Investigation Wing informed the Assessing Officer of the assessee that they have carried out large scale investigation to unearth a huge racket including accommodation entry providers. Such entry providers found to be involved in giving accommodation entries in the form of bogus gifts/loans/share capital money etc. by cheques/DDs in lieu of cash received from the beneficiaries.
The list of beneficiaries who have taken accommodation entries from such person/firm including the name of Bimla Devi. Now, the present assessee is Maya Gupta and not Bimla Devi. Then, in the chart, only the value of entry taken is mentioned but the nature of entry whether it is a bogus gift, loan or share capital money is not mentioned. Moreover, on what basis the above presumption is drawn that the assessee has taken any accommodation entry is also not mentioned. No reference is made to any statement given by any accommodation entry provider or any documentary evidence found from their premises which indicated any accommodation entry being taken by the assessee. Therefore, on these facts, in our opinion, the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Signature Hotels P.Ltd. (supra) and Insecticides (India) Ltd. (supra) would be squarely applicable because the information on the basis of which the Assessing Officer had initiated proceedings under Section 147 was vague and uncertain. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the learned CIT(A) rightly held that the reopening of assessment was not valid. Accordingly, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI
ITA No. 3435/Del/2013 – Assessment Year : 2003-04
Income Tax Officer,
Vs.
Mrs. Maya Gupta
ORDER
PER G.D.AGRAWAL, VP:
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-XXIV, New Delhi dated 22nd March, 2013 for the AY 2003-04.
2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law CIT(A) erred in
1. Invalidating the reopening of the assessment and assumption of jurisdiction by the AO U/s 147/148 of the IT Act in the case by treating the same as bad in law.
2. Quashing the assessment order passed by AO wherein an addition of Rs.35,77,293/- on account of income from unexplained sources u/s 68 ofthe Income Tax Act.
3. The appellant craves the right to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal.”
3. We have heard both the sides and perused the material placed before us with regard to ground No.1 of the Revenue’s appeal. The reasons for reopening of assessment are reproduced by the Assessing Officer at pages 1 & 2 of his order. The same is reproduced below for ready reference:-
“The Investigation Wing, Delhi conducted large scale investigation to unearth a huge racket involving accommodation entry providers. Such entry providers were found to be involved in giving accommodation entries in form of bogus gifts/loans/share application money/capital gain etc. by cheques/DDs in lieu of cash received from intending beneficiaries. The entry providers operated large number of bank accounts in their own names and also in fictitious names. The list of beneficiaries who had taken accommodation entry from such persons/firms included the name of Bimla Devi.
The detail of accommodation entries taken by the assessee and particulars of entry providers is as under:-
