Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 878 - ITAT MUMBAIRevision u/s 263 - setting aside the assessment order u/s. 153A and directing the AO to make a fresh assessment order - bogus purchases - Held that:- We find that the assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings, had supplied the party-wise details of purchases and a copy of the same has been placed in the paper-book. Upon perusal of the same, it could be gathered that the during impugned AY, the assessee had not made any purchase from M/s Realstone Exports Limited as wrongly noted by Ld. Pr.CIT. The said fact is also evidenced from the information provided by Audit wing & extracted wherein we find that the purchases from this entity are stated to be made during AY 2010-11 and not in 2009-10. Therefore, the assessment order, at least to that extent could not be termed as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue from any angle and therefore, jurisdiction u/s 263, in this regard, could not be held to be valid. Regarding purchases made from other entity, AR has submitted that since complete details thereof were submitted during the course of assessment proceedings which were accepted by Ld. AO with due application of mind and therefore, proceedings u/s 263 were bad. We find that no discussion, whatsoever, on this aspect has been made in the assessment order. Nothing on record suggest that AO, during assessment proceedings, made further investigation, to verify the genuineness of the purchases made by the assessee from the aforesaid entity. This being the case, the submissions made by Ld. AR, in this regard, could not be accepted. The Ld. AR has relied on the case of Raja Bahadur Motilal (P) Ltd Vs ITO [1990 (3) TMI 60 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] for the same. However, we find that this decision has been rendered in the context of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 and therefore, do not apply to the case in hand. No opportunity of being heard was provided to the assessee in violation of principle of natural justice - Held that:- We find that a show-cause notice was issued to the assessee and the same was duly replied to by the assessee wherein the assessee agitated the proposed proceedings and demanded further details from Ld. Pr.CIT without demonstrating as to how the figures were not matching. This being the case, we do not find any force in this argument raised by Ld. AR. We hold that the revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 invoked by Ld. Pr.CIT with respect to alleged bogus purchases made by assessee from M/s. Utkantha Trading Pvt. Ltd. were valid in law whereas the direction to verify the purchases made from M/s. Realstone Exports Ltd. were bad in law. The impugned order stand modified to that extent. The assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order.
|