TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 1370
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), dated 13.12.2019 for AY 2012-13. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: "1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the illegal notice u/s 148 issued by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A) is illegal and bad in law. 2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the reopening of the case made by the AO u/s 148 of the Act, and the assessment framed u/s 147 by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A) is illegal, arbitrary and excessive. 3) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the action of the AO in making addition of Rs. 27,93,150/- on account ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... brokers who have made 54565 client code modification and the volume of sale and purchase transactions is Rs. 6311/- Crore. The brokers and the client in whose favour client code modifications are made are spread all over India. The assessee is also one of the clients whose name is included in the list of modified clients in the details provided by NSEL. As per this information, the assessee company is a beneficiary to the tune of Rs. 27,93,150/- by way of client code modification during the F.Y. 2011-12 relevant to AY 2012-13. Accordingly, to verify the contents of the information the case was reopened u/s. 147 of the I. T. Act, 1961 after obtaining the approval of the Pr. CIT-2, Kolkata. Accordingly notice u/s. 148 of the I. T. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion. AO without bringing anything on record to evidently demonstrate his observations for initiating the impugned proceeding, concluded that "As per the information the assessee company is a beneficiary to the tune of Rs. 27,93,150/- by way of client code modification during the FY 2011-12 relevant to AY 2012-13. The same is treated as bogus and arranged transaction and disallowed. Amount of Rs.27,93,150/- is added back to the total income of the assessee company for the FY 2011-12 corresponding to AY 2012-13." 2.2. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who also confirmed the addition made by the Ld. AO. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee emphasized on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... code modification. The AO has simply followed the Investigation Report without application of mind which is not permissible in law. 4. Per contra, Ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that assessee has failed to provide any details and explanation in respect of the benefit arrived by it from the client code modification. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, prima facie we are of the view that the impugned notice is without jurisdiction as it lacks reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. As already noted above, AO initiated the proceeding for the purpose of verification of contents of the information received by ....