BINDAL AGENCIES PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1172/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 February 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRIMANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submission that no loan was taken from M/s Santoshima Trade Links Limited, based on the balance sheets provided. Therefore, the matter was set aside for re-examination by the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was reopened under section 148 based on a search operation where it was alleged that the assessee had taken bogus accommodation entries. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 5,00,000/- to the assessee's income, which was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of alleged bogus accommodation entries was justified, and if the assessee had provided sufficient explanation for the transaction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 148,Section 132(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRIMANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS

Hearing: 27.02.2024Pronounced: 27.02.2024

आदेश / O R D E R PER MANOMOHAN DAS, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre.

1.

Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 16-08-2023 in respect of the Assessment framed by the learned Assessing Officer [AO] for the Assessment Year [AY] 2012-13.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-13 on 07-09-2012 admitting a total income of Rs. 19,26,630/- and the same was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 02- 02-2015 raising a demand of Rs. 58,860/-. Subsequently, the case was reopened under section 148 after obtaining necessary approval and notice u/s 148 dated 01-02-2017 and other statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee, in compliance to such statutory notices submitted a copy of the return of income on 27-05-2017. Actually, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Mr. VipulVidur Bhatt and other entities related to him. During the search action a statement of Mr. VipulVidur Bhatt was recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act wherein, Mr. VipulVidur Bhatt accepted that he is an entry operator and all the searched entities / companies are bogus entities / companies which are used by him for providing various bogus accommodation entries to the various beneficiaries for commission.

During that search and seizure action, the entire books of accounts, income tax related documents, company law matter related documents etc. of bogus entities / companies were found at undisclosed premises in Mumbai. The PAN cards of bogus entities which are managed and controlled by Shri VipulVidur Bhatt were also seized by the Department.

On perusal of the ledger accounts of the bogus entities / companies, it is seen that the assessee, Bindal Agencies Pvt. Ltd. has taken the following bogus entries.

Sl. Name of the Name of the PAN FY Debit Credit No. bogus entity assessee / beneficiary 1. M/s M/s Bindal AACCB3892N 2011-12 10,00,000 0 Santoshima Agencies P Trade Links Ltd. Limited However, the assessee vide his reply denied that he has taken any bogus accommodation entries from anybody during the financial year 2011-12.

The ld. AO after consideration of the reply of the assessee observed that the assessee has not explained properly the genuineness of the transaction and financial capability and credit worthiness of the lender.

The ld. AO observed that the assessee simply stated that there was no transaction with M/s Santoshima Lease Fin Investment Ltd during the FY 2011-12 and did not give answer about the transaction with M/s SantoshimaTradelinks Limited. The ld. AO from the copy of the ledger account in the books of M/s SantoshimaTradelinks Limited observed that the assessee received RS. 5,00,000/- during the year under consideration and therefore, rejected the claim of the assesse and accordingly, vide his order dated 27-12-2017 added that amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the total income of the assessee.

3.

Being aggrieved, the assessee filed 1st appeal before the ld. CIT(A) unsuccessfully.

4.

Being aggrieved, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

Heard the representatives of both the parties and perused the materials on record.

6.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee did not raise any loan from M/s SantoshimaTradelinks Limited and accordingly prayed for sending the matter to the ld. AO for fresh examination. The Ld. DR however, submitted that the assessee did not give any reply regarding the transaction with M/s SantoshimaTradelinks Limited before the ld. AO.

7.

We carefully considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials submitted by the parties. The Ld. AR submitted copies of the balance sheets as on 31-03-2011 and 31-03-2012 the perusal of which we found force on the submission of the assessee that he did not raise any loan from M/s Santoshima Trade Links Limited. Therefore, it is our considered opinion that the matter should be re-examined by the ld. AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 16-08- 2023 as well as order of the ld. AO dated 27-12-2017 to the extent relating to the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- and direct the ld. AO to re- examine the issue of the said addition of Rs. 5,00,000/-. At the same time, we direct the assessee to substantiate his claims before the ld. AO.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced on the 27TH day of February, 2024, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →