RAJIV AGARWAL Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed by the Assessees, inter alia, impugning separate notices dated 31st March, 2015 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter the 'Act') for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09 and further proceedings initiated pursuant thereto. At the request of the Assessees, the reasons for re-opening the assessments was disclosed to them. The said reasons as provided to the Assessees indicate that proceedings for re-assessments were initiated on the basis of a complaint received by the Income Tax Authorities. Since the reasons disclosed as well as the issues involved are similar, these petitions were heard together.

(2.) Briefly stated the relevant facts are as under:

(3.) Mr S. Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for the Assessees/Petitioners has contended that the entire exercise of initiating re-assessment proceedings is based on a mere suspicion and the AO had no material to form a reason to believe that income of the Assessees had escaped assessment. He contended that a mere complaint by a person could not possibly constitute tangible material on the basis of which the AO could form a belief that income of the Assessees has escaped assessment. He relied upon the decision of this Court in CIT v. Atul Jain (2008) 299 ITR 383 (Delhi) and drew the attention of this court to paragraph 16 and 17 which read as under: