Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: TDS :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: VAT Audit :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: due date for vat payment :: empanelment :: form 3cd :: VAT RATES :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: articles on VAT and GST in India
 
 
From the Courts »
 Ravneet Takhar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ix And Ors.
 Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax
 Formula One World Championship Limited Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-3 And Anr.
 Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation-3 Delhi Vs. Formula One World Championship Ltd. And Anr.
 Reliance Communications Ltd vs. DDIT (ITAT Mumbai)
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
 Ashok Prapann Sharma vs. CIT (Supreme Court)a
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - III Vs. M/S SUREN INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD
June, 07th 2013
                  THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                   Judgment delivered on: 07.05.2013

+       ITA No.289/2012

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - III                              .....   Appellant

                           versus


M/S SUREN INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD                               .....   Respondent

Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant       :Mr Amol Sinha, Sr.Standing Counsel with
                         Mr Deepak Anand, Mr.Anshum Jain &
                         Mr Rahul Kochar, Advocates.
For the Respondent      :Mr S. Krishnan, Advocate.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

                                 JUDGMENT


VIBHU BAKHRU, J



1.      This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

referred to as "the said Act") has been filed on behalf of the revenue challenging

the order dated 23.12.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in ITA

No. 2941/D/2010, pertaining to the assessment year 2002-03. The Tribunal has,

by its order dated 23.12.2011, quashed the proceedings initiated, by the

Assessing Officer, on the basis of a notice under Section 148 of the said Act






ITA No.289/2012                                                       Page 1 of 16
issued for reopening the assessment pertaining to the said assessment year 2002-

03. The notice under Section 148 of the said Act was issued on 25.03.2009

which is beyond the period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment

year. The Tribunal held that as there has been no failure on the part of the

assessee to disclose material facts and the same is also not alleged either in the

notice under Section 148 or in the reasons recorded for initiating reassessment

proceedings, the reassessment proceedings are illegal and without jurisdiction. In

absence of failure, on the part of the assesse, to disclose fully and truly all

material facts necessary for the proceedings, the Assessing Officer would lack the

jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal has

quashed the reassessment order.

2.      The challenge on the part of the revenue to the order passed by the

Tribunal has to be considered in light of the following facts.

3.        The assessee filed its return of income on 31.03.2003 declaring an

income of ` 30,18,779/-. The said return was initially accepted under Section

143(1) on 30.05.2003. However, subsequently on 20.10.2003, the same was

taken up for scrutiny. The balance sheet and the books of account of the assessee

disclosed that, during the relevant previous year, the assessee had received an

aggregate sum of ` 4,82,01,000/- as share application money from various

persons and the same was outstanding, pending allotment of shares.                  The

Assessing Officer issued a detailed questionnaire to inquire into the said share



ITA No.289/2012                                                      Page 2 of 16
application money and sought details of the share applicants who had paid the

share application money to the assessee company.              The Assessing Officer

thereafter        conducted   an   inquiry   to   determine   the   genuineness         and

creditworthiness of the transactions relating to the share applications.                The

assessee produced confirmations from the concerned share applicants during the

course of the assessment proceedings. In order to make further inquiries, the

Assessing Officer issued summons under Section 131 of the Act to 25 parties

from whom the share application money had been received. Initially, some of the

summons were received back unserved and the assessee was asked to furnish

fresh addresses, which were provided by the assessee. However even thereafter

summons to certain persons were received back and the assesse again provided a

fresh set of addresses with respect to those persons. The hearings for examining

the noticees under Section 131 were fixed on 07.03.2005, 22.03.2005 and

23.03.2005.         One of the persons examined under Section 131 declined to

acknowledge any relationship with the assessee and consequently the amount of

share application money deposited by the said party amounting to ` 5,00,000/-

was added as income in the hands of the assesse, as unexplained credit in the

books of accounts, in terms of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Whilst some of

the parties to whom summons under section 131 were issued remained unserved,

in certain other cases the share-applicants did not come forward on the scheduled

dates of hearing for being examined.              The Assessing Officer, thereafter,



ITA No.289/2012                                                          Page 3 of 16
concluded that a sum of ` 42,00,000/- on account of share application money was

liable to be taxed as unexplained credit in the books of accounts under Section 68

of the Income Tax Act.

4.      The assessment made by the Assessing Officer by the order dated

30.03.2005 was carried in appeal by the assessee. The assessee contested the

assessment made by the Assessing Officer and in support of his contentions

furnished letters of confirmation, photocopies of share application forms,

photocopies of income tax returns, balance sheets, pan cards and bank statements

of the share applicants in respect of whom the additions were made in the

assessment order dated 30.03.2005. The assessee further produced evidence to

show that in some cases, the share application money had since been refunded.

The CIT (Appeals) forwarded the additional evidence produced by the assessee

to the Assessing Officer for examining the same and furnishing a report thereon.

The Assessing Officer submitted a report dated 07.10.2005 reiterating the issues

mentioned in the assessment order. The CIT (Appeals) concluded that some of

the persons to whom summons had been issued could not appear before the

Assessing Officer due to paucity of time and, in the light of the subsequent

evidence, deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of

` 37 lacs. The addition of ` 5 lacs in relation to the share applicant who had

categorically stated that she had no link with the assesse was upheld by the

CIT(A).



ITA No.289/2012                                                      Page 4 of 16
5.      It can be seen from the above facts that the assessee furnished all

particulars relating to the share application money including confirmations from

the share applicants as well as other evidence in relation to those persons, who

the Assessing Officer had found to be suspect.

6.       It is the case of the revenue that during certain investigation proceedings,

a statement of one Shri Deepak Gupta was recorded on 25.09.2004 (that is, while

the assessment proceedings were still pending). Shri Deepak Gupta has allegedly

admitted that he was providing accommodation entries to the assessee. It has

been contended on behalf of the revenue, that based on the statement made by the

said Deepak Gupta, the Assessing Officer came to believe that income during the

relevant previous year had escaped assessment and the Assessing Officer issued

the notice dated 25.03.2009 under Section 148 of the Act, seeking to reassess the

income of the assessee under Section 147 of the Act. The assessee requested for

the reasons for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the said Act which were

furnished by the Assessing Officer. The assessee objected to the reasons,

however the same were rejected by the Assessing Officer.

7.       The reasons for issuance of the notice under Section 148, inter alia,

alleged that the assessee had taken certain accommodation entries. The reasons

for reopening of the assessment proceedings furnished by the Assessing Officer

are as under :-







ITA No.289/2012                                                        Page 5 of 16
      "12.03.2009 Reasons for issue of notice u/s 148 in the case of M/s
      Suren International Pvt. Ltd AY 2002-03

      Return in this case was filed at an income of ` 10,74,990 on
      29.10.2002

        Enquiries were conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Dept. In
      this inquiry it was found that one Mr Deepak Gupta S/o Late Shri J.N.
      Gupta R/o Shastri Nagar, Delhi 110052 was indulging in providing
      accommodation entries. In his statement recorded on 25/09/2004, he
      has admitted that he takes cash from various parties and gives them
      DD/Cheque by charging his commission. This DD/Cheque is then
      introduced by these parties as share Capital or Loan in their books of
      accounts.




       M/s Suren International Pvt Ltd has taken following accommodation
      entries from the accounts operated by Deepak Gupta which have been
      credited in its account with BOP, Karol Bagh Branch in A.Y 2002-03,
      THE DETAILS ARE GIVEN BELOW:
         VALUE    INSTRU   DATE ON     NAME OF    BANK     BRANCH   A/C NO
         OF       MENT     WHICH       ACCOUNT    FROM     OF       ENTRY
         ENTRY    NO BY    ENTRY       HOLDER     WHICH    ENTRY    GIVING
         TAKEN    WHICH    TAKEN       OF ENTRY   ENTRY    GIVING   ACCOUN
                  ENTRY                GIVING     GIVEN    BANK     T
                  TAKEN                ACCOUNT

         500000            26-JUL-01   B.I.C.     SBP      DG       50088
                                       CONSULT
                                       ANT S P
                                       LTD

         500000            26-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--   --DO--   50088

         500000            26-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--   --DO--   50088

         500000            26-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--   --DO--   50088

         500000            26-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--   --DO--   50088

         500000            26-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--   --DO--   50088

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   DINANAT    OBC      MINTO    19
                                       H                   ROAD
                                       LAHURIW




ITA No.289/2012                                                      Page 6 of 16
                                       ALA

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO-    19

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   --DO-      --DO-      --DO-    19

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   --DO-      --DO-      --DO-    19

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   --DO-      --DO-      --DO-    19

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   --DO-      --DO-      --DO-    19

         500000   495673   21-JUL-01   --DO-      --DO-      --DO-    19

         250000   142208   30-JUN-01   DINESH     JAILAXMI   FATEHP   11246
                                       GUPTA                 URI
                                                  COOP
                                                  BANK

         250000   142208   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   11246

         250000   142208   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   11246

         250000   142208   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   11246

         250000   142208   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   11246

         250000   142208   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   11246

         500000   257601   6-JUL-01    ENPOL(PV   --DO--     --DO--   3340
                                       T)

         500000   257601   6-JUL-01    --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3340

         500000   257601   6-JUL-01    --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3340

         500000   257601   6-JUL-01    --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3340

         500000   257601   6-JUL-01    --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3340

         500000   257601   6-JUL-01    --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3340

         450000   499344   24-MAY-01   LANDMAR    --DO--     --DO--   3194
                                       K
                                       COMMUNI

                                       CATION
                                       PVT LTD

         450000   499344   24-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3194

         450000   499344   24-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3194

         450000   499344   24-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   3194




ITA No.289/2012                                                        Page 7 of 16
         450000   499344   24-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   3194

         450000   499344   24-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   3194

         500000   145084   02-JUL-01   LEELA      --DO--    --DO--   8644
                                       DHAR

         500000   145084   02-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   8644

         500000   145084   02-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   8644

         500000   145084   02-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   8644

         500000   145084   02-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   8644

         500000   145084   02-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   8644

         500000   329725   30-JUN-01   MANOHA     --DO--    --DO--   1556
                                       R    LAL
                                       MANISH
                                       KUMAR

         500000   329725   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   1556

         500000   329725   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   1556

         500000   329725   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   1556

         500000   329725   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   1556

         500000   329725   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   1556

         480000   269479   18-MAY-01   PROFAN     IND BAK   CH       5035
                                       FINANCE              CHOK
                                       &
                                       INVESTME
                                       NT LTD

         480000   269479   18-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   5035

         480000   269479   18-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   5035

         480000   269479   18-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   5035

         480000   269479   18-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   5035

         480000   269479   18-MAY-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   5035

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   SUMA       CORPN     KB       2919
                                       FINANCE
                                       INVESTME
                                       NT LTD.

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--    --DO--   2919




ITA No.289/2012                                                       Page 8 of 16
         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   2919

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   2919

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   2919

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   2919

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   2919

         500000   311122   18-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   2919

         250000   135415   30-JUN-01   SUSHIL     JAILAXMI   FATEHP   10081
                                       GOYAL      COOP       URI
                                                  BANK

         250000   135415   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   10081

         250000   135415   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   10081

         250000   135415   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   10081

         250000   135415   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   10081

         250000   135415   30-JUN-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   10081

         500000   503258   27-JUL-01   SWETU      OBC        MINTO    33
                                       STONE P.              ROAD
                                       LTD

         500000   503258   27-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   33

         500000   503258   27-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   33

         500000   503258   27-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   33

         500000   503258   27-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   33

         500000   503258   27-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   33

         500000            25-JUL-01   TECNOCO    SBP        DG       50060
                                       M
                                       ASSOCIAT
                                       ES PVT.

         500000            25-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   50060

         500000            25-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   50060

         500000            25-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   50060

         500000            25-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   50060

         500000            25-JUL-01   --DO--     --DO--     --DO--   50060




ITA No.289/2012                                                        Page 9 of 16
         500000     145067   02-JUL-01   VIPIN     JAILAXMI   FATEHP      9378
                                         KUMAR     COOP       URI
                                                   BANK

         500000     145067   02-JUL-01   --DO--    --DO--     --DO--      9378

         500000     145067   02-JUL-01   --DO--    --DO--     --DO--      9378

         500000     145067   02-JUL-01   --DO--    --DO--     --DO--      9378

         500000     145067   02-JUL-01   --DO--    --DO--     --DO--      9378

         500000     145067   02-JUL-01   --DO--    --DO--     --DO--      9378

         3,65,80,   TOTAL
         000        AMOUN
                    T




              In this case information have been received that their goods
      have been seized by DRI and also penalty of Rs 2 Crores is levied by
      Commissioner Customs (ICD).

               From the above details and the Statement of Mr. Deepak
      Gupta who has admitted that he has not carried out any business
      activity accept that of providing accommodation entries as described
      above that of providing accommodation entries as described above, it
      is seen that the assesee has diverted its own money into the business
      by way of taking accommodation entries. Thus the amounts stated in
      table above taxable u/s 68 of the Act and hence, I have reason to
      believe that an amount of Rs 3,65,80,000/- has escaped assessment
      within the meaning of section 147 of the IT Act 1961.

              Since 4 years have been elapsed, the assessment record is
      being submitted for kind perusal and approval of the Commissioner of
      Income-Tax, Delhi-III, New Delhi according to section 151 (1) of the
      IT Act, 1961 for issuance of notice u/s 148 of I.T. Act.

                                                                       -sd/-
                                                            (D.D. YADAV)
                                             Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
                                                       Circle 9(1), New Delhi"




ITA No.289/2012                                                            Page 10 of 16
8.      The alleged accommodation entries, tabulated in the reasons for issuance

of the notice under section 148, totaling ` 3,65,80,000/- formed the basis of

initiating the reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer recorded that he

had reason to believe that the amount of ` 3,65,80,000/- has escaped assessment.

It is relevant to state that the reasons as furnished by the Assessing Officer, first

of all, did not disclose any allegation that the assessee had failed to make any

disclosure for the purposes of the assessment. Secondly, it would be pertinent for

us to mention that a bare perusal of the entries listed in the table forming a part of

the reasons indicate that most of the entries have been repeated six times to form

the total of ` 3,65,80,000/-. The Assessing Officer has thus made an addition on

the basis of certain set of alleged entries which ex facie include the same entries

which have been repeated multiple times to arrive at the figure of

` 3,65,80,000/-. This is clearly evident from the fact that the details of

instruments through which payments are alleged to have been made are also

similar.

9.      We may also add that although the said reasons as furnished by the

Assessing Officer contain a statement that information had been received that

certain goods of the assessee had been seized by DRI and penalty had been levied

by Commissioner Customs (ICD), there is no allegation that any income had

escaped assessment on that count and thus the only reason for initiating




ITA No.289/2012                                                         Page 11 of 16
proceedings under Section 147/148 are the alleged accommodation entries

purportedly totaling ` 3,65,80,000/-.

10.     The Assessing Officer once again commenced inquiries with regard to the

amount received by the assessee as share application money, in the reassessment

proceedings and concluded that the identity, creditworthiness of the share

applicants and the genuineness of the transactions in relation to share application

money totaling a sum of ` 4,75,01,000/- was not established and accordingly

made an addition of the said amount. The Assessing Officer made a further

addition of ` 3,46,00,000/- to the income of the assesse on the alleged ground of

concealment of goods. The order of reassessment dated 24.12.2009 was carried

in appeal by the assessee, however the same was dismissed by the CIT (Appeals)

by an order dated 25.03.2010.

11.     The assessee thereafter preferred an appeal before the Tribunal against the

order dated 25.03.2010 passed by the CIT (Appeals), inter alia, on the ground

that the reassessment proceedings were based on change of opinion and the same

were initiated without there being a reason to believe that income had escaped

assessment. The Tribunal allowed the appeal holding that no omission or failure

to disclose all material facts, fully and truly, on the part of the assesse, was

alleged and consequently the reassessment proceedings were illegal and without

jurisdiction.




ITA No.289/2012                                                       Page 12 of 16
12.      The Tribunal also noted that the statement of Shri Deepak Gupta was

recorded on 25.03.2004 that is, prior to the framing of the first assessment and

subsequently the matter had traversed its course in appeal before the CIT(A). The

Tribunal also noted that a sum of ` 3,59,85,000/- had also been stated to be

refunded by the assessee to the share applicants. The Tribunal concluded that the

conditions for reopening the assessment under Section 147 were not satisfied and

hence, the reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant to the notice dated

25.03.2009 were illegal and quashed the same by the impugned order.

13.      We have heard counsels for the parties at length.

14.     The learned counsel for the appellant contended that even though there is
no specific allegation that the assessee had failed to disclose all the material facts
but the same can be gleaned from the reasons itself. We are unable to accept this
contention. In the first instance, we do not find the reasons as recorded by the
Assessing Officer to be reasons in law, at all. A bare perusal of the table of
alleged accommodation entries included in the reasons as recorded, discloses that
the same entries have been repeated six times. This is clearly indicative of the
callous manner in which the reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings are
recorded and we are unable to countenance that any belief based on such
statements can ever be arrived at. The reasons have been recorded without any
application of mind and thus no belief that income has escaped assessment can be
stated to have been formed based on such reasons as recorded.

15.     Having stated the above, we are also unable to accept the contention that
there has been failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts in
his return as, first of all, there is no such allegation in the reasons as furnished to




ITA No.289/2012                                                          Page 13 of 16
the assesse; secondly, we cannot ignore the fact that the enquiry into the share
application money had been conducted in detail by the Assessing Officer in the
first round of assessment. Having framed his assessment after enquiry into the
identity, genuineness and the creditworthiness of the share applicants, it would
not be open for the Assessing Officer to re-examine the same without there being
any material allegation of failure, on the part of the assesse, to make a full and
true disclosure. It is well-settled that in order to invoke the provisions of Section
147 of the Act, after a period of four years from the end of the relevant
assessment year, in addition to the Assessing Officer having reason to believe
that any income has escaped assessment, it must also be established that the
income has escaped assessment on account of the assessee failing to make returns
under Section 139 or on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose,
fully and truly, the necessary material facts. This Court in the case of Wel
Intertrade P. Ltd. & Anr. v. ITO: (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del) and Haryana Acrylic
Manufacturing Company v. CIT &Anr.: (2009) 308 ITR 38 (Del) held that it
would not be open for the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment already
done beyond the period of four years unless the income has escaped assessment
on account of failure, on the part of the assesse, to disclose all the material facts.
In the case of Wel Intertrade P. Ltd (supra) it has been held as under:

          "A plain reading of the said proviso makes it more than clear that
          where the provisions of section 147 are being invoked after the
          period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, in
          addition to the Assessing Officer having reason to believe that any
          income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, it must also be
          established as a fact that such escapement of assessment has been
          occasioned by either the assessee failing to make a return under
          section 139, etc., or by reason of failure on the part of the assessee
          to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his
          assessment, for that assessment year. In the present case, the
          question of making of a return is not in issue and the only question



ITA No.289/2012                                                         Page 14 of 16
          is with regard to the second portion of the proviso, which relates to
          failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all
          material facts necessary for assessment. Insofar as this pre-
          condition is concerned, there is not a whisper of it in the reasons
          recorded by the Assessing Officer. In fact, as indicated above, the
          Assessing Officer could not have made this a ground because the
          Assessing Officer had required the petitioner to furnish details with
          regard to loss occasioned by foreign exchange fluctuation which the
          petitioner did by virtue of the reply dated February 5, 2002. Since
          the petitioner had fully and truly disclosed all the material facts
          necessary for the assessment, the pre-condition for invoking the
          proviso to section 147 of the said Act had not been satisfied.

               In this connection, it may be relevant to note one decision,
          although there are several others. The said decision is that of the
          Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Duli Chand
          Singhania v. Asstt. CIT : (2004) 269 ITR 192. In the said decision,
          the High Court of Punjab and Haryana was faced with a similar
          situation. The court noted that there was not even a whisper of an
          allegation that the escapement in income had occurred by reason of
          failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all
          material facts necessary for his assessment. The court observed that
          absence of this finding, which is the sine qua non for assuming
          jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act in a case falling under the
          proviso thereto, makes the action taken by the Assessing Officer
          wholly without jurisdiction. We agree with these observations of the
          Punjab and Haryana High Court and are of the view that in the
          present case also, the Assessing Officer has acted wholly without
          jurisdiction. The invocation of section 147, the issuance of the
          notice under section 148 and the subsequent order on the objections
          are all without jurisdiction. The impugned notice as well as the
          proceedings pursuant thereto are quashed."

16.     In the reasons as furnished by the Assessing Officer, we find that there is
neither any allegation that the assessee had failed to truly disclose any material
facts at the time of assessment, nor can we readily infer the same in view of the




ITA No.289/2012                                                        Page 15 of 16
fact that a detailed enquiry had been conducted by the Assessing Officer with
regard to the identity and creditworthiness of the share-applicants and
genuineness of the transactions in relation to the share application money
received by the assessee. Further the mere statement that the DRI has seized
certain goods of the assessee and levied a penalty also cannot be stated to be a
reason for reopening of assessment of the assessee as the said statement made is
neither followed by the recording of a belief that the income escaped on that
count or that the assessee has failed to disclose all relevant material, fully and
truly, at the stage of the first assessment.

17.     We, accordingly, do not find any merit in the present appeal and no
substantial question of law has been raised for our consideration. The present
appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.




                                               VIBHU BAKHRU, J




                                               BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J


MAY 07, 2013
RK




ITA No.289/2012                                                        Page 16 of 16
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
System Testing Solution Manual Software Testing Solutions Automation Software Testing Solutions System Workflow Testing System Manual Testing

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions