Bundelkhand Ispat Melting Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Agra)
As a result of search and seizure operation AO observed that assessee received unsecured loan of Rs. 28,00,000/- which he held as undisclosed income of the assessee. Case was reopened and statutory notices were issued, for which no compliance was made by the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1) (b) were initiated, for which no compliance was made by the assessee. AO made addition of Rs. 28 Lakh as undisclosed income and further added Rs. 70,000/- as commission paid for providing accommodation entry.
On appeal CIT (A) observed that assessee used different PAN in Form 35 instead of one used for reassessment. Assessee neither file return in response to notice u/s 148 not it complied with the statutory notices. Hence, AO rightly made addition of Rs. 28,70,000/-. CIT(A) directed to the AO to verify the authenticity of order u/s 147/144 in the case of the assessee bearing PAN AADCB3941R against which appeal has been filed. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that assessee has filed the appeal using PAN AADCB5490K while the re-assessment order u/s. 147/144 was issued bearing PAN-AADCB3941R. CIT (A) also observed assessment order dated 11.02.2015 passed by the AO with PAN AADCB5490K. CIT (A) also held that assessee did not come with clean hands. Due to duplication of PAN details of the order u/s 143(3) dt 11.02.2015 bearing PAN AADCB5490K could not be located on the CASS/AST/ITD module.
