TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1412
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g grounds of appeal: "1. The Ld. PCIT has grossly erred in law and on facts in assuming jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act on the erroneous ground that the impugned assessment order is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 2. The Ld. PCIT has grossly erred in not appreciating that in order to invoke s.263, two conditions must be fulfilled viz. the impugned assessment order must be erroneous and that error must be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In the present case, Id. AO has passed the reasoned assessment order after analyzing all details and therefore there was no error in the impugned assessment order so as to justify action u/s.263 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the ver....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....during the impugned assessment year under consideration was conducting business under the name and style of "Siddhi Corporation" The case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act, on the ground that the assessee had obtained a "fictitious" loan by way of an accommodation entry from M/s Jalaram Finvest Limited, which was operated by Shri Dahyabhai I Thakkar, a known professional entry provider associated with the Dishman Group (M/s Dishman Carbogen Amics Ltd.). However, despite the reopening of the case, no addition was made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) regarding the fictitious loan during the assessment proceedings. Subsequently, Principal CIT initiated proceedings u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that not making of any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pened under Section 147 of the Act based on the same ground, and finally, the assessment was passed without any additions being made. The Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on several documents including the confirmation from Dishman Group, relevant extracts of bank statements, approval under Section 151, notices issued under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) by the Assessing Officer, the order passed by the Assessing Officer disposing of objections etc. to substantiate it's position that no loan was received from Dishman Group during the year in question, and in fact loan was repaid by the assessee, which had been properly accounted for. It was argued that the order passed by the AO is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erused the material on record. On going to the case records, the first thing that comes to the notice that the Department has not brought anything on record in the form of any evidence etc. that the assessee had taken loan of the amount which was mentioned in the 263 notice viz. for a sum of Rs. 52,02,531/- from the Dishman Group. We observe that in the reply to the assessing officer during the course of re-assessment proceedings, similar issue came up for consideration, wherein the assessee had submitted that the assessee had not received any loan from Dishman group during the year under consideration and therefore, 147 proceedings were initiated on an incorrect premise that the assessee had taken loan of the aforesaid amount from Dishman ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation entry of Rs. 52,02,531/-in the form of fictitious loan during the impugned assessment year under consideration from Dishman group. It was on the basis of submissions filed by the assessee that no additions were made during the course of original assessment proceedings. Therefore, we observe that firstly the 263 proceedings were initiated on an incorrect presumption of fact that the assessee had received accommodation transaction of Rs. 52,02,531/- from Dishman group during the relevant period, whereas there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the assessee had taken any accommodation entry by way of loan during the impugned year under consideration for the aforesaid amount. Secondly, this aspect was specifically enquired by the as....