TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 393
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15. 2. The appeal is delayed for filing by 56 days. The assessee has filed an application before us supported by duly sworn affidavit of the assessee explaining the cause of delay as all communications by the CIT(A) being served on an incorrect /inactive email-id of the assessee despite the appeal form mentioning the correct and active email-id of the assessee. He contended that all notices and order of the Ld.CIT(A) were served on [email protected] which was inactive while the assessee had given the correct email id being [email protected] pleaded therefore that the delay in filing of the appeal b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etween the information in possession of the AO and his formation of belief of escapement of income. The reopening, he contended, was done merely for the purposes of making enquiry and only on suspicion, but, not on the basis any belief of escapement of income, which was the requirement of law for assuming jurisdiction by AO to reopen cases u/s 147 of the Act. 9. We have gone through the reasons recorded by the AO, for reopening of the case of the assessee, which is reproduced at para 1 of assessment order as under: "1. In this case, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued through ITBA on 22.03.2019 and a copy of the same was also served through speed post. The reason recorded for re-opening assessment in this case is reproduced as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 16,250/-) as Registration fee was paid by assessee. The assessee had made cash deposits of Rs. 31,03,000/- in Punjab National Bank, Dholera Branch as seen from AIR information available in ITS data. In this way, the assessee has made investment of Rs. 8,87,525/- in property and has deposited Rs. 31,03,000/- in PNB, Dholera branch but Further, on verification of return of income for AY 201213. It is learnt that the assessee has shown income of Rs. 2,94,490/- only including agricultural income. So the source of such huge transactions remains unexplained and is required to be treated as income of the assessee during the FY. 2013-14. 4. The assessee has not disclosed the amount of Rs. 39,90,525/- in the return of income filed for AY....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ely on suspicion of escapement of income and not on the formation of any belief of escapement of income and also there was no nexus between the information in the possession of the AO and the formation of belief of escapement of income. This is evident from para 2 of the reasons which reveal that since the AO found that in the in the assessment finalized in the case of the assessee for the succeeding assessment year i.e. 2015-16, additions u/s.68, 50C and 56(2) of the Act were made and in the impugned year also he found the assessee to have made cash deposits and purchased immovable property valued at Rs. 5 Lakhs or more, he believed that since identical transactions were conducted by the assessee in the impugned year also income in relatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....during the year cannot lead to the belief of escapement of income. It can at most lead to only a suspicion of the investment made having been sourced from undisclosed sources of income. There is always a possibility of the investments being sourced from family, friends or others or from any non-taxable sources and without making further enquiry on the issue the AO surely could not have formed a belief of escapement of income. Therefore, we find that the reasons do not reveal any belief of the AO of income escaping assessment. It is merely a suspicion and, therefore, we agree with the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that in the absence of mandatory requirement of there being belief of escapement of income of the AO for assumption of valid juris....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (c) where an assessment has been made, but- (i) income chargeable to tax has been underassessed; or (ii) such income has been assessed at too low a ratett; or (iii) such income has been made the subject of excessive relief under this Act; or (iv) excessive loss or depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed; (ca) where a return of income has not been furnished by the assessee or a return of income has been furnished by him and on the basis of information or document received from the prescribed income-tax authority, under sub-section (2) of section 133C, it is noticed by the Assessing Officer that the income of the assessee exceeds the maximum amount not cha....