TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be cancelled. 4. That the notice, initiation and all subsequent proceedings u/s 148 is bad in law, is without jurisdiction, barred by law and requires to be cancelled. 5. The notice u/s 148 and service thereof is bad in law and the reassessment requires to be cancelled. 6. The conditions precedent to justify the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act being absent, the reopening of the assessment is bad in law and the reassessment requires to be cancelled. 7. That the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act is bad in law, as the appellant had disclosed the material facts fully and truly necessary for assessment and there is no new or fresh information or evidence warranting reopening of the assessment. 8. That the entire reassessment proceedings violates the procedure prescribed by the Supreme Court in 259 ITR 19 for 148 proceedings. 9. The reassessment proceedings is on a change of opinion on the same set of facts without there being any new evidence or information which is not permitted under law. 10. The reasons / findings of the Authorities below are unsustainable and untenable in law as there is no relations....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....portunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 25. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority, the appellant begs for consequential relief in the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 26. For the above and other grounds and reasons which may be submitted during the course of hearing of the appeal, the assessee requests that the appeal be allowed as prayed and justice be rendered. The assessee craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute or amend the above grounds, at any time before or at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is an individual and filed her return of income belatedly and therefore the return filed by her was treated as invalid. The assessee is a Director of M/s. BMM ISPAT Ltd. and earned income from house property, Capital Gains and other sources. 3. Based on the information through AIMS (Actionable Information Monitoring System), penny stock issue was examined based on the return of income. In the invalid return, the assessee had declared Short Term Capital Gains u/s. 111A of the Act. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceedings u/s. 148 of the Act on 24/12/2019. 5. Again another show cause notice was issued on 24/12/2019 granting time upto 27/12/2019 to file the submissions. The assessee also filed her objection to the 143(2) notice on 26/12/2019 which was disposed off by the AO on 27/12/2019. Again the assessee filed another objection letter dated 26/12/2019 requesting to drop the proceedings initiated u/s. 148 of the Act since the reasons for reopening does not support the issuance of notice u/s 148. The said letter was not disposed off by the AO. The AO had furnished the reasons that the issue is penny stock issue and also the assessee had not filed her original return of income and therefore the reassessment proceedings are necessary. Thereafter the AO had considered the financials of M/s. Blue Circle Services Ltd. in which the assessee was allotted 5,00,000 shares of Rs. 10/- each at a premium of Rs. 5/- per share on preferential basis on 14/09/2010. The AO relied on the price movement of the said company and also the financial details, had concluded that the price of the scrip of M/s. Blue Circle Services Ltd. had moved in absolute disregard to the general market sentiments. The AO ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....other grounds on merits. The Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal on merits. The assessee is challenging the said order of the Ld.CIT(A) before this Tribunal. 8. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the orders of the lower authorities are illegal on so many grounds including the limitation. The Ld.AR further submitted that the notice u/s. 148 was not served within the period of limitation and also the reasons for reopening the assessment u/s. 148 are absent and therefore the order is bad in law. The Ld.AR further submitted that the AO had erred in relying on the statements of various persons without furnishing the same to the assessee before passing the assessment order and therefore the assessment order is bad in law. Similarly, the Ld.AR submitted that the findings of the Investigation Directorate of Kolkata and Mumbai were not furnished to the assessee and also the order of the SEBI and the SIT report on the black money and therefore submitted that the assessment order is bad in law. The Ld.AR further submitted that the AO had not granted any opportunity to cross examine the persons who gave statements and therefore the proceedings are liable to be set aside. The Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee enclosed the acknowledgment at page no. 306 and also enclosed the objections at page no. 307 which was uploaded by the assessee on 26/12/2019 at about 07:36 pm. The AO had considered the objections filed by the assessee on 26/12/2019 at about 01:51 pm which was filed in response to the notice issued u/s. 143(2) of the Act in which the assessee had objected that the notice issued u/s. 143(2) without furnishing the copy of the reasons for initiating the proceedings u/s. 148 is bad in law and also against the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 259 ITR 19. The said proceeding was available in page no. 309 of the paper book. As seen from the said proceedings, the AO had considered the objections filed by the assessee on 26/12/2019 in which the assessee had objected that the proceedings initiated u/s. 148 without furnishing the reasons for the reopening is bad in law, alone has been considered. The AO had not considered the submissions made by the assessee on the very same date i.e. 26/12/2019 at about 07:36 pm in which the assessee had raised several grounds attacking the reasons for reopening the assessment ....