Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1610 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - reopening after expiry of four years - bogus purchases - reopening based on just information received from DDIT-Investigation Wing, Mumbai - HELD THAT:- AO was having just information and the same is part of assessment order. Hence, it is established that the reasons were recorded just on the basis of information without any material and the same is not sufficient for reopening the assessment completed under scrutiny proceedings of Sec.143(3) - the relevant assessment year under consideration is 2007- 08, whereas reopening was on 28/03/2014 by issue of notice u/s.148. Since the assessment was reopened after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the department has to show that there is failure on the part of the assessee to make return u/s.139 or in response to notice issued u/s. 142(1) or Section 148 are to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year. However, nowhere department has shown that there is any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts in the return of income so filed, accordingly, in terms of the jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of IPCA Laboratories Ltd., vs. Gajanand Meena, DCIT & Others [2001 (7) TMI 100 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] no reopening after expiry of four years is valid unless department shows that there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Accordingly, we do not find any justification in the reopening so made u/s.147. Bogus purchases addition - From the record we found that the assessee had submitted all the documents during the assessee proceedings, such as purchase bill, sales against said alleged purchase, payment by account payee cheque, confirmation of accounts of alleged parties, stock register. The assessee has also produced the complete books of accounts, AO has not pointed out any mistake in such records. The assessee has also produced the retraction statement of alleged parties. AO has not provided any cogent material in support of his claim. There is no material on record other that the third party statement, which were also retracted. Alleged parties have also replied to summons issued u/s 131 of the Act and provided all the required details to the AO. The assessee has produced the director/partner of alleged parties and the Ld. AO had recorded the statement on oath. In the whole statement there is no adverse answer by the said director/partner of alleged parties. No merit for the addition so made by the AO when all the documentary evidences with respect to the purchases, corresponding sales, quantitative statement was filed before the AO. The alleged party has also replied to the summon issued by the AO u/s.131 and provided all the information required by the AO - Decided in favour of assessee.
|