Nishit Fincap Pvt Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Query No. 7 is in relation to share capital and share application money received. This means that specific query was raised in respect of share application money and vide reply dated 16.11.2009, the assessee furnished all details as required by the Assessing Officer.
Pursuant to the reply of the assessee and on perusal of the details, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the three share applicant companies. Not only these companies complied with the notices received u/s 133(6) of the Act from the Assessing Officer, but all of them filed confirmations, confirming the transactions along with bank statements and copies of Income Tax returns.
On the basis of these documents, which are part of the paper book, I have no hesitation to hold that the observation of the Assessing Officer that the share applicant companies are non-est is without any basis.
The original assessment was completed after due verification from share applicant companies and share applicant companies have been assessed to tax u/s 153C read with section 153A of the Act post search and post enquiries made by the Assessing Officer.
In my considered opinion, considering the totality of the facts of the case in hand, I find that reopening is nothing but change of opinion when every aspect was examined in the original assessment proceedings.
Considering the facts in light of the aforesaid ruling of the Hon’ble High Court, notice u/s 148 of the Act is set aside and assessment order framed pursuant to such notice is, accordingly, quashed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] – 6, New Delhi dated 15.02.2017 pertaining to assessment year 2007-08.
2. Vide Ground Nos 1 to 1.6, the assessee has challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings by raising several issues and claiming that the notice issued u/s 148 of the income tax Act is bad in law.
3. Ground Nos. 2, 3 and 4 challenge the addition on merits of the case.
4. Representatives of both the sides were heard at length, case records carefully perused and with the assistance of the ld. Counsel, we have considered the documentary evidences brought on record in the form of Paper Book in light of Rule 18(6) of ITAT Rules and have also perused the judicial decisions relied upon by both the sides.
5. Facts on record show that, in this case, the original assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘The Act’ for short]. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer came to notice that the assessee company had received accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 38 lakhs during the year under consideration. This was pursuant to the information received from the Investigation Wing and on the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. The reasons for belief that income had escaped assessment read as under:
