TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 487
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short 'the Act'). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1.That the NFAC erred in confirming the action of the AO of passing the assessment order on the basis of original return filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act for the AY 2015-16 (in place of AY 2018-19) by the assessee. In reply of notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act, assessee has filed his return of income u/s. 148 of the Act for the AY 2018-19 on 12.12.2022 and the same has been informed to the AO by the assessee. But the AO has passed an assessment order on the basis of original return for the AY 2015-16 (in place of AY 2018-19) without rejecting and taking cognizance of the return filed by the assessee u/s. 139(1) and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ided to the assessee before creating such a huge demand. 5. That the National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in confirming the assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act passed by the AO is bad in law, wrong on facts and absolutely based on suspicious surmises and conjectures. 6. That the NFAC erred in confirming the issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, dated 31.3.2022 as well as the service of the same to the assessee on 1.4.2022, issued by the Assessing Authority which is barred by limitation u/s. 153 of the Act. 7. That the NFAC erred in confirming the action of the AO of addition of income which was already credited in the books of accounts as well as trading and profit and loss account of the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act on 02.12.2022, in compliance the assessee filed copy of ITR, Bank account statement, Audit Report, ledger account in respect of M/s Rajesh Kumar Suresh Kumar and Sons and M/s Sonu Monu Telecom Centre Pvt. Ltd. The AO considered the submissions filed by the assessee and issued a show cause notice dated 2.2.2023 wherein, the assessee was show caused as to why the total amount of Rs. 33,00,190/- should not be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. AO after analyzing the information from the CBIC and the nature of transactions reported by the assessee noted that it is confirmed that the transactions claimed to have been made with the above two parties are fake. Hence, the total amount received from them of Rs. 33,00,190/- i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Act in place of return filed u/s 148 of the Act by the assessee. He further submitted that notice u/s 143(2) of the Act has never been issued to the assessee against the return filed u/s 148 of the Act by the assessee. Hence, he requested that assessment may be quashed on this count. On merit of the case, Ld. AR submitted that NFAC erred in confirming the action of Assessing Authority who has wrongly made addition of income of the assessee amounting to Rs. 33,00,190/- u/s. 69A of the Act, made by the AO on surmises and conjectures which is against the statue and bad in law, thus, the addition be deleted. 5. During the hearing, Ld. DR filed the copy of notice u/d. 148 dated 31.3.2022 and stated that the same was issued within time.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....said documents were not considered by the AO and he made addition of Rs. 33,00,190/- under section 69Aof the Act. It is further noted that at the time of assessment proceeding the assessee has given following reply to the Ld. A.O. "In response to reply of para no. 5 & 6, we want to submit that the assessee has sold 419 pcs of Mobile phone (MOTO E4) for Rs. 25,00,000/- (including GST Rs. 267857.14) vide bill no. GST-454 dated 30.03.2018 to M/s. RAKESH KUMAR SURESH KUMAR AND SONS (PAN No. ERDPS8030N) and the delivery of the same was taken self by the buyer from my premises and against the said material the buyer has already given advance of Rs. 25,00,000/- on dated 14.12.2017 through RTGS into my account. It is further noted that the dealer h....