Jasneet Kaur vs Income Tax Officer

Bhavnesh Saini, J

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-14, New Delhi, Dated 21.01.2015, for the A.Y. 2010-2011.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the case of assessee was reopened under section 147/148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for assessment year under appeal on the basis of information received from ACIT, Circle-9, New Delhi, vide letter dated 14.11.2011 that assessee had received accommodation entry in the garb of gift from entry providers. In fact, search and seizure operation was conducted on 26.03.2010 in the case of Assem Kumar Gupta and Group and other beneficiary group of cases wherein Shri Aseem Kumar Gupta has accepted in his statement that he is providing accommodation entries in the form of share capital, share premium, bogus expenses etc through various companies and entities controlled by him and his associates. As per the seized documents, assessee had obtained the accommodation entries of the impugned amount. The assessee is beneficiary of accommodation entries received from entry provider M/s S.G.portfolio Pvt. Ltd. of M/s Jiwan Flora Ltd., During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that she received the amount of Rs.15,37,500/- on account of sale of shares of M/s Jiwan Flora Ltd. from M/s S G portfolio Pvt. Ltd. The assessee also submitted before the Assessing Officer that she received the aforesaid shares of M/s Jiwan Flora Ltd. as gift from one person namely Mr. Manoj Kumar on 01.04.2009. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer conducted enquiries and noted that Sh. Manoj Kumar was not a genuine donor and had no creditworthiness of gifting shares worth of Rs.15,00,000/-to the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had obtained accommodation entry in the garb of sale of 1,50,000 shares of M/s Jiwan Flora Ltd. through M/s S G portfolio Pvt. Ltd. And, therefore, he treated the aforesaid amount of Rs.15,00,000/- as the unaccounted income of the assessee and added it to the income of the assessee. Besides, the Assessing Officer also added 5% of the cheque amount, amounting to Rs.75,000/- as unexplained expenditure incurred for obtaining the accommodation entry. The Assessing Officer computed the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.17,68,390/- against the declared income of Rs.1,93,390/- vide order dated 11.03.2013 u/s 143(3)/148 of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal. Prior to that appeal was adjourned many times on the request of Counsel for Assessee and ultimately, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite service of the notice.

The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Order of the A.O.

After considering the submissions of the Ld. D.R. and facts noted in the Orders of the authorities below, it is clear that A.O. received specific information that assessee received accommodation entries through the bogus entry providers. The assessee failed to produce the donor as well as failed to substantiate the transaction of gift. When summons were issued to the donor to appear before A.O, the summons returned un-served with the remarks "no such person". These facts clearly supports the findings of the authorities below and that on specific information case was reopened that assessee received bogus gift through entry providers. In the absence of any representation from the side of the assessee and any specific material on record to explain the above issue, I am of the view that no interference is called for in the matter. I confirm the Orders of the authorities below and dismiss the appeal of assessee.

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed.