It is pertinent to note that there is no incriminating material shown by the Assessing Officer upon which the addition was made. In fact, the seized ledger accounts pertains to A.Y. 2011-12 only and therefore the said material cannot be held against the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13 and also cannot be termed as incriminating material. While making the additions on these documents, the Assessing Officer has not specifically pointed out that these expense but has disallowed all these expenses only on ad-hoc basis which is not permissible under the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the additions made itself does not have any foundation as such. Thus, the appeal of the Revenue does not sustain. In result, appeal being ITA No. 4292/Del/2016 filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
15. In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Sec. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961— Re-assessment - Assessment was completed in respect of discount and rebate which was categorically inquired by the AO during the original assessment. All the details were before the AO and after verification only the AO passed original assessment without giving any adverse finding to that effect. The bank statement called for and the information given by the bank to the AO itself reveals that the transaction and the payments were the genuine payments in respect of discount and rebate. There is no doubt or suspicious arise from the perusal of these documents. Merely creating a doubt of the transaction does not suffice the AO to reopen the case u/s 148 of the Act. The AO has to give proper reasons in case those documents are not at all produced in the original assessment itself. The reasons recorded by the AO u/s 148 are not complete reasons and lack in the context of invocation of Section 148 itself. Therefore, the reopening itself is bad in law. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. - SHARUK PASSI V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2020] 23 ITCD Online 128 (ITAT-DELHI)
It is pertinent to note that there is no incriminating material shown by the Assessing Officer upon which the addition was made. In fact, the seized ledger accounts pertains to A.Y. 2011-12 only and therefore the said material cannot be held against the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13 and also cannot be termed as incriminating material. While making the additions on these documents, the Assessing Officer has not specifically pointed out that these expense but has disallowed all these expenses only on ad-hoc basis which is not permissible under the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the additions made itself does not have any foundation as such. Thus, the appeal of the Revenue does not sustain. In result, appeal being ITA No. 4292/Del/2016 filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
15. In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Sec. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961— Re-assessment - Assessment was completed in respect of discount and rebate which was categorically inquired by the AO during the original assessment. All the details were before the AO and after verification only the AO passed original assessment without giving any adverse finding to that effect. The bank statement called for and the information given by the bank to the AO itself reveals that the transaction and the payments were the genuine payments in respect of discount and rebate. There is no doubt or suspicious arise from the perusal of these documents. Merely creating a doubt of the transaction does not suffice the AO to reopen the case u/s 148 of the Act. The AO has to give proper reasons in case those documents are not at all produced in the original assessment itself. The reasons recorded by the AO u/s 148 are not complete reasons and lack in the context of invocation of Section 148 itself. Therefore, the reopening itself is bad in law. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. - SHARUK PASSI V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2020] 23 ITCD Online 128 (ITAT-DELHI)