TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1273
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial on record, we find that the assessee has raised the above additional ground of appeal challenging the jurisdiction of the AO to make addition. In our opinion the issued raised in the additional ground is a purely a legal issue qua which all the facts are available in the appeal folder and no further verification of facts are required from any quarter whatsoever. In our considered view the assessee is at liberty to raise any legal issue before any appellate authority for the first time even when the same has not been raised before the lower authorities. The case of the assessee is squarely coverd by the decisions of the Apex court in the case of i) Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688, ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 and also by the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in PCIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal). Therefore, we are inclined to admit the same for adjudication. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2013-14 on 23.12.2013 declaring total income of Rs. 2,27,100/-, which was processed u/s 143(1). Notice u/s 148 was issued on 30.03.2021 by the Jurisdictional Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rials available on record, we find that the Section 151A of the Act deals with the faceless assessment of income escaping assessment and was brought on the statue book by taxation and other law (relaxation and amendment of certain provisions) Act, 2020, with effect from 01.11.2020 which was notified on 29.03.2022 vide notification no.18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL(Part)]. Therefore, the issuance of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act and thereafter framing of assessment by the NFAC, in our opinion, is without jurisdiction as the Provisions of Section 151A of the Act were effective from 29.03.2022. In considered opinion the assessment framed is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of the co-ordinate in case of MD Mahimud SK Vs. ITO in ITA no. 2230 & 2229/KOL/2024 vide order dated 04.03.2025, wherein the co-ordinate Bench has decided the issue by observing and holding as under: - "11. We have perused the section of Section 151A of the Act, which deals with the faceless assessment of income escaping assessment and was brought on the statute book by taxation and other law (realization and amendment of certain pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same for sale of unlisted investments during the year to three parties namely M/s Axisline Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 19,50,000/-, M/s ShivashivDealtrade Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,23,00,000/- and ) M/s PanghatVincom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 45,00,000/-. The reasons assigned by the Ld. AO for the additions u/s 68 are (a) the counter-parties are stated to be shell/strike-off companies with no real source of income as per Investigation Wing reports; (b) the unquoted shares were sold at Rs. 500/- per share which according to the AO "unquoted shares by no means can fetch in market"; (c) entry-providers Shri Ashok Kumar Kayan and Shri Bikash Sureka are alleged to have admitted in their statements u/s 131 that their accounts were used for accommodation entries and the Appellant's name figures in the beneficiary list; and (d) the Appellant allegedly did not produce evidence of acquisition of the shares and justification of price. The Ld. CIT(A) has simply affirmed these findings. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials on records. We note that Rs. 1,87,50,000/- represented sale consideration of unlisted equity investments held by the Appellant as Investments. The said investments /h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bank of India was itself opened on 17.09.2012 which is evident from the bank statement on the very first page. The AO has not brought any materials on records substantiating that the assessee had any other bank account. 12. We note that the information acted upon by the Department itself revealed that the alleged credit of Rs. 12,90,000/- from Ambika Steel House was traced in the HDFC Bank A/c of Ambika Steel House and the alleged Rs. 40,00,000/- from Zenith Commosales in the HDFC Bank A/c of Zenith Commosales neither of which is the assessee's account. Therefore onus to prove receipt by the Appellant rests on the Revenue and has not been discharged. 13. We also note that the additions is based upon information/reports of the DDIT (Inv.) Kolkata which are in turn based on statements recorded u/s 131 of Shri Ashok Kumar Kayan, Shri Bikash Sureka, Shri Prakash Sonkar and Shri Prasant Bhatt. We note that the assessee specifically requested to supply of the said reports and statements and opportunity of cross-examination vide its reply dated 25.03.2022. Neither the reports/statements were supplied nor cross-examination afforded. Use of third-party material against an assessee wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion should not be made Ms/ Mr/ M/s, 1. We appreciate the anxiety and uncertainty that is facing all of us in the times of Covid-19. This communication is to assist you in ending one uncertainty, which is pending e-Assessment in your case for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The variations as per the draft assessment order may be seen which are proposed to be made in your case :- Credible information had been received for the FY 2014-15 relevant to AY 2015-16, that the assessee had aggregated credit turnover is Rs. 16.99 lacs and debit turnover is 16.99 lacs during the period 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015 in the bank accounted maintained in Bank of Baroda bearing a/c no. 39920100006975. Prima facie there was reason to believe that the assessee had total credit/deposit in bank account during the FY 2014-15 relevant to AY 2015-16 is Rs. 38,65,557/-, which has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Assessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated after recording reasons and seeking prior approval of Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax. Accordingly, statutory notice U/s 148 of the Act was issued & sent to the assessee by DIN & Document No. ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore 25.02.2022. The assessee again failed to furnish any reply. 4. It is a part of record that during the course of assessment proceedings sufficient opportunity and reasonable time was granted to the assessee but he did not bother to comply with the notices and to provide the vital information /documents so as to enable the assessing officer to complete the assessment. Needless to mention here that when a statutory notice has been issued, it is the duty of the assessee to respond and to furnish the required information. Further, while scrutinizing the case it would be of great importance to have an idea about assessee's intention behind the non co-operation. The immediate idea that can be formed is that the assessee might have taken it beneficial to evade the proceedings rather than to co-operate in furnishing the information to avoid further investigation in the matter. Therefore, in the absence of relevant reply from the assessee, the matter is being decided as per the record available. 5. After pursing the reply of the assessee and the return of the income filed u/s 148 that the assessee is driving income from the business and income from other sources. After considering ....