Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 130 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - Bogus purchase - HELD THAT:- Before Ld. CIT(A) no specific submission was made against such re-opening, no doubt the assessee has challenged the validity of reopening before the Ld. CIT(A). CIT(A) in his categorical finding held that assessee has not made any specific submission on reopening. It was also held that information received from Sales Tax Department is sufficient to lead to the believe that income of ae is escaped assessment. We find that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Peass Industrial Engineers (P.) Ltd. [2016 (8) TMI 277 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held that where after scrutiny assessment, AO received information from investigation wing that well known entry operator of country provided bogus entries to various beneficiaries, and assessee was one of such beneficiary, Assessing Officer was justified in reopening assessment. In view of the aforesaid factual and legal discussion and by following the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Peass Industrial Engineers (P.) Ltd. (supra), we do not find any infirmity in the reopening. This ground No.1 of assessees appeal is dismissed. Bogus purchases - As neither the books of assessee was rejected nor the sales of assessee is disputed. The Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order treated the recorded nature of business of assessee “trading”. In trading, the sales are not possible in absence of purchase. In our view if there is allegation of bogus purchases and the AOmade the addition on the basis of third party information without disputing the sales of assessee and without rejecting the books of account of assessee, though the assessee could not fully substantiate the genuineness of such purchase, the entire disallowance of aggregate of purchase is not justified. In such circumstances to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage, only profit element in such purchase may be disallowed. AO has nowhere disputed the sales of assessee. In such circumstances a reasonable and adhock disallowance would be sufficient to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that @ 10% of aggregate of purchase would be sufficient to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage. Disallowance of carry forward loss / unabsorbed business loss - We find that while filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) no such ground of appeal was raised. Therefore, thereby the assessee has raised new and additional Ground of appeal. No application for admission of additional grounds of appeal is filed before Tribunal. The addition based on factual appreciation of fact, in our view, once the assessee has not raised such ground of appeal before ld CIT(A)/ FAA, the assessee is now precluded to raise such ground of appeal before Tribunal. Thus ground of assessees appeal is dismissed.
|