|
|
« From the Courts » |
---|
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs | Hero Motocorp Ltd. 34, Community Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. Vs. ACIT Circle-11(1) New Delhi. | Sadruddin Tejani vs. ITO (Bombay High Court) | GE India Industrial Private Limited, Building No.7A, 4th Floor, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-III, Sector-25A, Gurgaon, Haryana Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(1), New Delhi | DCIT vs. Pepsi Foods Ltd (Supreme Court) | DCIT Circle-7(1), Room No. 403, C. R. Building, I. P. Estate New Delhi VS Dee Development Engineers Ltd. 1255, Sector-14, Faridabad | Balbir Singh Kohli 74, Scindia House Connaught Place, New Delhi V/s ITO Ward-14(4) New Delhi | SYSKA LED Lights Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI (Bombay High Court) | Macrotech Developers Limited vs. PCIT (Bombay High Court) | 150 CA/ICWA/CFA vacancies in Bank of Maharashtra | Little Angels Education Society vs. UOI (Bombay High Court) | Virender Kumar, CA MR Sahu & Associates, H.No.651, FF, Sector 10A, Gurgaon Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Rewari. |
|
|
|
|
|
« Gurudwara Kalgidhar Singh Sabha, R.K. Puram, Sector-6, Delhi... | M/s Scan Holdings Pvt. Ltd., F-4, Shopping Complex, A Block,... » |
Shri Bishan Sharup Gupta, New Delhi Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 45 (4), New Delhi. |
|
February, 22nd 2021 |
This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi, Dated 28.12.2018, for the A.Y. 2010-2011, challenging the reopening of the assessment under section 147/148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and addition of Rs.12,19,594/-.
We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties through video conferencing and perused the material available on record.
3. Briefly the facts of the case are that in this case information from ADIT (Inv.), New Delhi vide his letter Dated 26.08.2016 has been received. On perusal of the report, it was seen that M/s. Yogesh Trading Co. has maintained Bank account in Mahamegha Urban Cooperative Bank, Ghaziabad which bears Account No.xxxxx13022 and reflects the credit of Rs.1.37 crores. As per the report, transaction was found to be without any economic rationale and it is suspected that money laundering activities were being carried-out. The assessee has not filed return of income for the A.Y. 2010-2011. The A.O. has recorded reasons for reopening of the assessment, copy of which is filed at pages 1 to 4 of the PB and after taking administrative approval Dated 31.03.2017, issued notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on Dated 31.03.2017 which was served upon the assessee, however, no return has been filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act.
For more information
|
|
|