TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 870
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per the return of Income filed on 30.03.2015 was at Rs. NIL. 2.2 That the income tax department was in the possession of certain credible information as per which the assessee had received the amount of Rs. 82,00,000/- with bogus companies namely M/s jay Jyoti India Private Ltd. controlled & operated by Shri Sharad Darak Indore. That the above transaction was not disclosed by the assessee company in its returns of income filed. Subsequently the case was selected by the Income Tax department for the Reassessment under the provision of section 147 of the Act. 2.3 Accordingly statutory notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 30/03/2021 and duly served to the assessee electronically. Prior to issuance of the said notice, reason for re-opening was recorded and prior approval of the appropriate authority was taken. The assessee filed return of income in response to the above notice on 20.04.2021 declaring NIL income. Accordingly notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee on 12.07.2021. Subsequently notice u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 along with questionnaire was issued on 05.01.2022 and duly served upon the assessee. The assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant fails on merits also. 12. In the result, the appeal is dismissed on account of non- prosecution as well as on merits." 2.10 That the assessee being aggrieved by the "Impugned Order" has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal & has raised following grounds of appeal in the Form No. 36 against the "Impugned Order" which are as under:- "1. That on the facts and circumstances of case the impugned order is illegal, perverse, bad in law and passed in violation of principle of natural justice; 2. The learned NFAC (A) was not justified not to consider that the issue of notice u/s 148 of L.T. Act, was barred by limitation and as such the assessment made on the basis of it was illegal, ab initio void and without jurisdiction; 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice issued under section 148 by the learned Ld. AO is illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction and barred by time limitation, hence, the reassessment order dated 30/03/2022 passed by the learned Assessing Officer (NFAC) is also illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 4. The NFAC/Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred in framing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Rs 82,00,000/- and confirmed the Assessment order. 2. That the Appellant company was incorporated in 2010 and is engaged in business of Colonizer, contractor, builder and developer of residential projects of townships. 3. That for the year under consideration the Appellant originally filed return of Income on 30/03/2015 declaring total loss of Rs 5,700/- although there was no sale during the year. 4. That the Case of Appellant was responded under the provision of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act by way of issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act on 30/03/2021. The reason recorded for re-opening are such that in case of present Appellant High Risk CRIU/VRU information on "Insight portal" and also information was received from the ADIT (Inv.) 1, Bhopal vide letter F. No. ADIT (Inv.)-1/BPL/SD/19-20 dated 05/ 02/2020 that during the F.Y 2013-14, the Appellant has allegedly received accommodation entry from M/s JAY JYOTI INDIA Pvt Ltd. which was found to be bogus company whose director is Shri Sharad Darak, who is said to be an Indore-based 'accommodation entry operator, residing at H.No. 9, Bhojnagar, Indore. 5. That during the year Appel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al, on the following GROUNDS as under" 3. Record of Hearing 3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 09.02.2026 when the Ld. AR for & on behalf of the Assessee appeared before us & interalia bought to our notice that the instant appeal is a covered matter & that there are number of orders of this Tribunal wherein it has been held that broad issue with regard to M/s Jay Jyoti (India) Private Ltd., being paper company & other companies of Sharad Darak group has not been accepted. The Ld. AR has placed on record of this Tribunal a paper book containing pages 1 to 57, On page 57of the PB is the copy of confirmation from Jay Jyoti India Private Limited dated 01.04.2014 giving confirmation for Rs. 2,00,000/-, on page 5 is the ITR is for AY 14-15 showing loss of Rs. 5700/-, on page 8 & 9 is COI (computation of Income) of Rs. 5700/-. The Ld. AR for the assessee has also placed reliance on case law compilation from pages 1 to 54 demonstrating that the entire issue is covered one by several orders of this Tribunals itself. Reliance was placed on the following decisions of this Tribunal:- 1) Sanjeev kumar agrawal v/s ACIT (Central)-2, Bhopal [ITA No. 899....