TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.2025 passed for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals erred in law and on facts in confirming the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147, which is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. The reopening under section 147 is invalid as it is based on borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer. 3. The reasons recorded do not establish any live nexus between the appellant and the alleged escapement of income and therefore the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 is invalid. 4. The reassessment proceedings are vitiated as the Assessing Offi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, amend or modify any of the above grounds at the time of hearing." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. 2,35,340/-. Subsequently, based on information received from the Investigation Wing and data available on the Insight Portal, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act. The information indicated that the assessee had allegedly entered into transactions amounting to Rs. 29,81,262/- in the nature of accommodation entries or fictitious loans through entities controlled by Shri Jignesh Shah and Shri Sanjay Shah, who were found to be engaged in providing bogus entries during search proceed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed accommodation entries. The assessee also challenged the addition on merits, contending that no material evidence was brought on record to establish that any fictitious loan or accommodation entry was taken and that the addition was made merely on the basis of third-party information without providing opportunity for cross-examination. Further, the assessee challenged initiation of penalty proceedings. 6. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), at the outset, observed that there was a delay of more than 500 days in filing the appeal and no condonation petition was filed by the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal was liable to be dismissed in limine. However, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) proceeded to examine the matter on merits as well. It was noted that the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to identify and specify the exact nature of alleged income escaping assessment in the hands of the assessee. The reasons recorded merely state that the assessee has entered into transactions of Rs. 29,81,262/- in the nature of accommodation entries, without specifying whether such entries pertain to unsecured loans, share capital, bogus gains or any other category of income. This clearly demonstrates non-application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer. 11. Further, we observe that the Assessing Officer has not brought on record any specific details such as the name of the entity from which such alleged accommodation entries were received, the date-wise transactions, the mode of transaction or the nature of such entries. The r....