Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 467 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - period of limitation for revising of the order u/s 263 - bogus purchases - Held that:- In re-opened proceedings as the issue of purchases was re-opened and this issue was also subject matter of original proceedings. Hence, the issue related to verification of purchases merged with the re-opened proceedings, where admittedly issue of bogus purchases was the basis for re-opening. Thus, the facts in the present case are distinguishable from the facts of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Alagendran Finance Ltd. [2007 (7) TMI 304 - SUPREME Court]. In the instant case thus the limitation for revising of the order u/s 263 would start from the order passed u/s 143(3) read with section 148 of the Act but not from the date when the original assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Thus, this ground of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Genuineness of the investment - eligible for deduction u/s 10B - Held that:- The assessee can not be allowed to take advantage of its own wrong. By claiming the bogus expenditure the assessee has certainly caused prejudice to the interest of the revenue. The component of investment which is claimed as business expenditure may be unexplained investment, which is claim under the garb of trading expenditure. Keeping this in view, we do not see any reason to interfere into the action of the Ld. CIT(A), same is hereby affirmed. This ground of assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Before parting we may also hold that even if the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue that the profit arising out of the bogus purchases would be eligible for deduction u/s 10B even then the revenue cannot be precluded to examine the issue from the stand point of genuineness of investment. - Decided against assesee
|