TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1992
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of cases, The assessee company is identified as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions by the Directorate after making the necessary enquiries. It has been revealed that the following entries have been received by the assessee: Name of Beneficiary Amount (Rs.) Cheque/ DD No. Date Bank Detail Name of the company used for providing accommodation entry Name of the Middleman/ Mediator M/s Haryana Distillery Ltd. 50,00,000 214327 18.12.2007 DCB Finage Lease & Finance India Ltd. KK GARG 'The above amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- has been credited into assessee's bank account in F Y. 2007-08. Investigation made by the Investigation Wing of the Department has found that assessee is a beneficiary of taking the aforesaid accommodation entries. I have also perused various materials and report from Investigation Wing and on that basis it is observed that the assessee company has introduced its own unaccounted money in its bank account by way of above accommodation entries. On perusal of the documents on record as well as the information received from the investigation wing, I am satisfied and have reason to believe tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....et of the assessee company and noted that the earning per share of the assessee company as on 31.03.2008 was Rs.0.51 per share. He asked the assessee to explain regarding the identity and credit worthiness of the share applicants and the genuineness of the transactions within the meaning of section 68 of the IT Act. From the details furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noted that the applicant companies are either not having any income or having negligible income as per their balance sheet. He further observed that the assessee has also taken share capital of Rs.50 lakhs from Finage Leasing & Finance (India) Ltd. through S.K. Jain who is an intermediary. He referred to the search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the IT Act conducted at the business and residential premises of S.K. Jain group of cases, the modus operandi adopted by them and observed that as per the report of the Investigation Wing, the assessee, M/s Haryana Distillery Ltd., has been identified as one of the beneficiaries from these companies handled by S.K. Jain group of cases. Since Finage Leasing & Finance (India) Ltd., is a dummy company and not having capacity to deposit such a huge amount as share c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the IT Act, 1961. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, the CIT(A), relying on various decisions, held that the initial onus cast on the assessee to prove the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the persons in whose name the credit entries are appearing by way of share capital/share premium, loan or credit, etc., has not been discharged. Distinguishing various decisions cited before him and relying on various other decisions, the ld. CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer has correctly made the addition u/s 68 of the IT Act. 6.2. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in:- 1. initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in the absence of any plausible reason for the formation of a belief as to the escapement of any income; 2. issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act as the same was barred by limitation in terms of first proviso to section 147 of the Act; 3. not disposing of the objections filed u/s 147/148 in response to reopening of assessmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and there was no such doubt raised by the Assessing Officer nor any defect or deficiency was pointed by the Assessing Officer. Further, the information received by the Assessing Officer on the basis of which he has reopened the assessment is very vague, unspecific and incomplete. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer is not justified. For the above proposition, the ld. counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions:- i) Amar Jewellers Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 4 (Guj); ii) Pr. CIT vs. Light Carts P. Ltd. (2018) 404 ITR 574 (All); iii) NTPC Ltd. vs. DCIT (2014) 360 ITR 380 (Del); iv) NTPC Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 614 (Del); v) DIT vs. Mc Donalds Corporation (2013) 213 Taxman 26 (Del); vi) BLB Limited vs. ACIT (2012) 343 ITR 129 (Del); vii) CIT vs. Noble Resources (2011) 202 Taxman 223 (Del); viii) CIT vs. Sil Investments Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 166 (Del); ix) D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. ACIT (2010) 324 ITR 234 (Del); x) JSRS Udyog Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 313 ITR 321 (Del); xi) Wel Intertrade P. Ltd. vs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supported the order of the CIT(A). He submitted that the assessee, during the original assessment proceedings, has not furnished the full particulars regarding the identity and credit worthiness of the loan creditors and the genuineness of the transaction. There was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the completion of the assessment. Therefore, the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the IT Act is fully justified. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, he submitted that the assessee in the instant case has failed to substantiate with evidence to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding the identity and credit worthiness of the share applicants and the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) is fully justified under the facts and circumstances of the case. 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material available on record. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the original assessment in the instant case was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30th December, 20....