Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2012-13, which upheld the Assessing Officer's addition of Rs. 27,40,950/- as commission income from providing accommodation entries, estimated at 2%. The assessee was identified as being involved in the 'Jain Hawala Scam' and had received significant cash deposits. Despite repeated opportunities, the assessee failed to appear or submit any material before the CIT(A) or the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal dismissed all grounds of appeal, including the challenge to the reopening of assessment and the validity of the Section 148 notice, due to the assessee's failure to furnish any supporting material. The addition of commission income was upheld, and the charging of interest under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D was confirmed, as the assessee presented no controverting evidence against the lower authorities' findings. Consequently, the entire appeal was dismissed.
Key Issues
1. Validity of reopening of assessment and notice under Section 148. 2. Addition of commission income from providing accommodation entries. 3. Charging of mandatory interest under various sections of the Income Tax Act.
Sections Cited
148, 234A, 234B, 234C, 234D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY
बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-19(3) ..... �ितवादी/Respondent CR Building, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ� �ारा/ Appellant by : None �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Ms. Shivani Bansal , Sr. DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 12/09/2024 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 28/11/2024 आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 15.02.2023, for assessment year 2012-13.
In ground no. 1 to 5 of appeal, the assessee has assailed reopening of assessment. In ground no. 6 of appeal, the assessee has assailed addition of Rs.27,40,950/- made by Assessing Officer (AO) on account of commission earned by the assessee in providing accommodation entry. The AO estimated commission at the rate of 2% of the accommodation entries provided to the beneficiary.
A perusal of file reveals that appeal has been adjourned 11 times either due to non appearance of any representative of the assessee/appellant or at the request of assessee. Today again no one is present to represent the assessee, nor any request for adjournment has been received from the assessee. It seems that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. Therefore, this appeal is taken up for adjudication with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and on the basis of material already on record.
Ms. Shivani Bansal, representing the department submits that information was received from investigation wing of the department that the assessee has received huge cash deposits during the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer after examining entire gamut of transactions came to the conclusion that the assessee is providing accommodation entries against commission. The assessee is part of Surendra Kumar Jain and Virendra Jain of ‘Jain Hawala Scam’. The assessee has earned commission by providing accommodation entry to the tune of Rs.13,70,47,500/-. Thus, the AO estimated commission at the rate of 2% of entries provided to its beneficiaries by rotation of funds. In appeal by the assessee before CIT(A), no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite repeated notices, hence, the CIT(A) upheld the addition. A factual report was called from the AO which was placed on record on 23.11.2023.
Submissions made by ld. DR heard and orders of the authorities below examined. The assessee in ground no. 1 to 5 of appeal has assailed reopening of assessment and has also challenged validity of notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act. However, no material is furnished by the assessee in support of the grounds raised. Hence, ground no. 1 to 5 of appeal are dismissed being devoid of any merit.
In ground no. 6 of appeal, the assessee has assailed addition of Rs.27,40,950/- on merits. The assessee in appeal before the CIT(A), failed to respond to any of the notices. Before the Tribunal as well, the assessee/AR of the assessee except for seeking repeated adjournments has not made submissions either in writing or otherwise. In absence of any controverting material, I find no reason to interfere with the findings of the authorities below. Hence, ground no. 6 of appeal is dismissed.
In ground no. 8 of appeal, the assessee has assailed charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. Charging of interest under aforesaid sections is mandatory and consequential; hence, in absence of any controverting material ground no. 8 of appeal is also dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on Thursday the 28th day of November, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िद�ी/Delhi, �दनांक/Dated 28/11/2024 NV/- �ितिलिप अ�ेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 1. 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िद�ी /DR, ITAT, िद�ी 4. गाड� फाइल/Guard file. 5.