Tulsi Infraheights Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Agra)
₹1.71 Crore Addition Collapses—A Mechanical Sanction Cannot Sustain Reopening!
Mechanical Section 151 Sanction Quashes Reassessment
The background: An entry operator’s search triggers reassessment
The assessee company filed its return for AY 2012-13 on 28 September 2012, declaring nil income. Subsequently, a search conducted on 18 November 2015 in the case of Pradeep Kumar Jindal led the Department to identify the company as an alleged beneficiary of accommodation entries amounting to ₹1,67,50,000 from three entities.
Based on this information, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 on 31 March 2019. The company filed its return in response, again declaring nil income.
The Assessing Officer recorded non-compliance with notices and absence of satisfactory explanations regarding the transactions. He added ₹1,67,50,000 as unexplained income from accommodation entries, along with alleged commission at 2.5%, amounting to ₹4,18,750. The total addition was therefore ₹1,71,68,750. The CIT(A) confirmed the assessment.
The company disputed both jurisdiction and the additions
Before the Tribunal, the company challenged the reopening on several grounds. It alleged that the reasons were vague, reflected borrowed satisfaction from the Investigation Wing, and did not establish a live connection between the information received and income escaping assessment.
