FRESH FACILITY MAINTENANCE PVT LTD(FORMELY KNOWN AS DREAMLAND BUILDCONE PVT LTD ),NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 9(3), NEW DELHI

Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Fresh Facility Maintenance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, (Formerly known as Dreamland Ward-9(3), Buildcone Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No. 1010, New Delhi-110002 Faiz Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCD0236A Assessee by : Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 29.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 02.09.2024 ORDER

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

“1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in upholding the legality and validity of proceedings initiated u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act and has further erred in confirming an addition made by the learned AO of Rs.1,65,00,000/-.

2. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the order of assessment in the absence of a notice u/s 148 of the Act having been served on the assessee company.

3. That the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that no valid sanction had been obtained by the learned AO from the concerned CIT and the purported sanction granted, if any, was mechanical.

2 Fresh Facility Maintenance Pvt. Ltd.

4. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the validity of initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act by misconceiving the facts. The pre-requisites of section 147 of the Act have not been satisfied in accordance with law and as such, no valid proceedings could have been initiated against the assessee.

As per information available on record i.e. ITR filed for A.Y. 2010- 11, the full and true disclosure with regard to the above transactions have not been made by the assessee company as the fact that the share capital and share premium is being introduced through these dummy company is nowhere disclosed by the assessee company. Hence, it is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material fact which attracts provisions of Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

S. No. Particulars A.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 Increase (+)/ Decrease (-) 1. Authorized Share 50,00,000 50,00,000 Nil Capital 2. Issued Subscribed 6,00,000 6,00,000 Nil and Paid up Capital 3. Security Premium 25,00,000 25,00,000 Nil Account 5. Thus, it is clearly proves that there was no amount has been received or introduced on account of either share capital or share premium as alleged by the Assessing Officer in his satisfaction note and hence, the “reasons to believe” as 3 Fresh Facility Maintenance Pvt. Ltd. contemplated as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have not been met by the Assessing Officer either on facts or legality. Hence, the order of the Assessing Officer is treated as void ab inito, in the absence of any valid reasons recorded.