TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 2016-17. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1.1 The order passed u/s. 250 on 22-08-2025 for A.Y. 2016-17 by NFAC, [CIT(A)], Delhi (for short CIT(A)" upholding the addition of Rs. 78,29,905/- being financial transaction with Shri Renuka Mata (A ' Multi State Urban Co. Op. Credit Society Ltd. (Renuka Mata Society) by A.O. is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 2.1 The ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding that the proceedings u/s 147 and notice u/s 148 were valid, though the condition precedent were not satisfied in as much as, the nexus or link between the appellant and the Renuka Mata Society was not pointed out. 2.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... maintained with Shree Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the information and observed that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 78,29,905/- during the financial year 2015-16. The assessee was asked to explain the source and nature of the said deposits. In response, the assessee submitted that the bank account was opened at the request of officials of the said society and that he had merely lent his bank account to unknown persons who deposited cash and subsequently withdrew the same. The assessee claimed that the money deposited in the account did not belong to him and that the account was used merely for routing funds of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Wing without independent application of mind. The assessee also contended that the request for inspection of records was not granted during the assessment proceedings and therefore the reassessment proceedings were in violation of principles of natural justice. The CIT(Appeals), however, rejected these contentions and held that the Assessing Officer had sufficient reason to reopen the assessment since tangible material in the form of information relating to cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee was available on record suggesting escapement of income. In this regard, reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [(2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC)], wherein it was held that reassessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....account was allegedly lent or any evidence to show that the funds belonged to someone else. In the absence of such evidence, the CIT(Appeals) held that the explanation of the assessee could not be accepted. The CIT(Appeals) further observed that under section 69 of the Act, where investments are found to have been made by the assessee and the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the nature and source of such investments, the value thereof may be deemed to be the income of the assessee. Since the cash deposits were found in the bank account of the assessee and the assessee failed to establish the identity of the depositors, the creditworthiness of such persons or the genuineness of the transactions, the CIT(Appeals) confirmed the additio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tangible material indicating escapement of income. Further, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Geetaben Dineshchandra Gupta vs. ITO (2021) 129 taxmann.com 346 (Guj.) has held that where information received from the Investigation Wing reveals that the assessee was involved in providing accommodation entries and commission income arising therefrom had not been disclosed, the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer regarding escapement of income is justified. In the present case also, the information regarding cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee provided sufficient basis for the Assessing Officer to form a prima facie belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Accordingly, we find no merit in the grounds r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on, we find that the same were on a different footing. In that case, the Tribunal noted that the assessee was an illiterate individual belonging to a poor strata of society who had allowed the bank account to be opened and operated by officials of Renukamata Society and that the assessee had signed blank forms and documents on the advice of the society's officials and tax consultant. The Tribunal also recorded that the assessee had acted under bona fide belief and was not aware of the scheme being carried out by the real beneficiaries. In the light of such peculiar facts, the Tribunal accepted the contention that the assessee was merely a name lender and granted substantial relief. 12. In the present case, however, no such circumstances ....