TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 534
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is bad in law and invalid. For this, the assessee has raised following ground Nos.2 to 5 :- "2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by CIT(A), Delhi-31 (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)) was not justified in sustaining the action of the AO as the notice issued u/s. 148 on the matter which was already covered in original assessment. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the action of AO as the matter was squarely covered in the original assessment which was in the favour of the appellant. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances and in law the Ld.CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action of AO because the impugned order passed by the Ld.AO is merely a change of opinion as the documents, relevant facts and material were present before him and considered by his predecessor while passing the original assessment order. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances and in law the Ld.CIT(A) while confirming the addition has not considered that the assessee has no role to play and is not the author of the assessment order and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by Sh. Rajesh Kumar. Hence, the total amount of Rs. 9,91,50,500/- which was credited in cash in the bank accounts of the Assessee Smt. Sangita Sharma remains unexplained. The entire transaction has been orchestrated by the Assessee, Smt. Sangita Sharma to bring her unaccounted money into her account using Rajesh Kumar as buyer of Shares. 7.3 It is clear from the above details that Assessee didn't disclose here Total Income correctly for purpose of Taxation. Therefore, following amount has escaped Assessment in the case of Smt. Sangita Sharma (PAN: AQMPS4577N) for the A.Y. 2012-13 (F.Y. 2011-12)." 4. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) adjudicated the issue of reopening by observing in paragraph Nos.9 and 10 as under :- "9. The main contention of the appellant is legal that once an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act has been concluded and returned income accepted by the AO, he cannot reopen the assessment for that assessment year and if he does so, the same amounts to change of opinion. Citing various case laws, the appellant has pleaded that the re-assessment be declared as invalid being based on reason to belie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase information was received from DDIT(Investigation), Unit-1(3), New Delhi that the Assessee Smt. Sangita Sharma had sold 7,00,000 Shares of M/s Mahadev Stock Broking Company Limited (later name changed to M/s Hum Tum Builders Ltd. and then to M/s LSL Tools Pvt. Ltd.) to Sh. Rajesh Kumar (Proprietor Cobra & Co.) at a total consideration of Rs. 9,73,00,000/ -. The whole amount of Rs. 9,73,00,000/- was received by the Assessee in cash in FY 2011-12 as per information received from Investigation Wing. The source of income of the Assessee Smt. Sangita Sharma for the year under consideration was rental income and agriculture income. As per computation of income for the AY 2012-13 submitted by the AR of the Assessee, income from capital gain is at Loss of Rs. 4,75,801/- from sale of shares after deducting indexed cost of acquisition shares. Assessee was asked to furnish the copy of register of members & shares transfer books of the company highlighting the purchase of shares and sale of shares. However, no compliance has been made by the assessee. Summons was also issued to Sh. Rajesh Kumar (Prop. Cobra & Co.) to furnish: (i) The source of Rs. 9,73,00....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....explained. The entire transaction has been orchestrated by the assessee, Smt. Sangita Sharma to bring her unaccounted money into her account using Rajesh Kumar as buyer of Shares. It is clear from the above details that assessee didn't disclose her total income correctly for purpose of taxation. Therefore, following amount has escaped assessment in the case of Smt. Sangita Sharma (PAN : AQMPS4577N) for A.Y. 2013-14 (F.Y. 2011-12). Name PAN Amount (in Rs. ) which may be treated as undisclosed income in the A.Y. 2012-13 relevant to the F.Y. 2011-12 Sangita Sharma AQMPS4577N Rs.9,91,50,500/- 6. In view of the above facts and the undersigned has reason to believe that the aforementioned amount of Rs. 9,91,50,500/- received in cash by Smt. Sangita Sharma from Sh. Rajesh Kumar remain unexplained. As assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 has been made in the case of the assessee for the year under consideration but this issue was not examined in that order and as such there is no question of 'Change of Opinion' on part of the AO. Hence it is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment as per the prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: 28.03.2019 Sd/- (Bandana Deori) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-29(1), New Delhi" 6. At this point of time, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the reason recorded for reopening of assessment was to examine the sale of shares by the assessee and receipt of cash of Rs. 9,91,50,500/- in her bank accounts as narrated in the reasons recorded. The learned Counsel specifically drew our attention to paragraph No.6 of the assessment order and stated that the Assessing Officer has recorded reasons in terms of Explanation 2(c) of Section 147 of the Act whereas the assessee's case clearly falls under the proviso to Section 147 of the Act. The learned Counsel drew our attention to the relevant proviso, which reads as under :- "Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect from April 1, 1989. The relevant part of the new Section 147 is as follows: "147. If the Assessing Officer, has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this Section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year) : Provided that where an assessment under Sub-section (3) of Section 143 or this Section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this Section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 or in response to a notice issued under Sub-secti....