Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

SYNBIOTICS LTD Versus UNION OF INDIA AND 2

2016 (9) TMI 1197 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Revision u/s 263 - Gross Profit ratio - disallowance of expenditure - additions on account of bogus purchases - Held that:- Assessing Officer disallowed the entire expenditure and added back the full sum of ₹ 62.75 lacs shown to have been expended by the assessee for purchases from F.H. Rizvi concerns. There was no further material with the Assessing Officer or even possible avenue for inquiring whether remaining purchases of assessee were genuine or not. There was thereafter, no further s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e notice issued by the Commissioner does not suggest that since it was found that all purchases from F.H. Rizvi by the petitioner were bogus, the Assessing Officer could have inquired into the genuineness of the remaining purchases also. All that the Commissioner conveyed by way of reasons in the impugned notice was that the Assessing Officer did not bear in mind the Gross Profit ratio element. It is true that increasing the Gross Profit is one of the modes adopted by the assessing authority whi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rofit ratio of the assessee during such year. Without there being any further material suggesting that other purchases were also not genuine, further increase of the Gross Profit ratio, was an option simply not available with the Assessing Officer. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5813 of 2004 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5815 of 2004 - Dated:- 26-9-2016 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. A.J. SHASTRI, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : MR B S SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE OR .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

crores (rounded off). The Assessing Officer confirmed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act ( the Act for short) on 29.3.1995 and assessed loss at ₹ 22 lacs (rounded off). The assessee filed appeal against such order. CIT(Appeals) by an order dated 24.3.1999 assessed the loss at ₹ 1.26 crores and thereby substantially allowing the appeal of the assessee. While these assessment proceedings thus achieved finality, the department in December 1999 carried out search o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

siderable length the materials at the command of the department to prima facie suggest that the purchases made by the assessee from F.H. Rizvi were bogus. During the assessment, pursuant to such notice, the Assessing Officer confronted the assessee with various purchases made from F.H. Rizvi and also fluctuations in Gross Profit ratio of the company from year to year. Despite opposition from the assessee, the Assessing Officer held that the entire purchases were bogus and that such expenditure s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment in revision, for which purpose, he issued the impugned notice dated 22.1.2004. In the notice itself, he had recorded his reasons for revising the order, relevant portion of which reads as under : On going through the records of the incometax assessment proceedings in your case for assessment year 1993-1994 and 19951996 it is noticed that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act dtd. 26.3.2002 for the AY 9394 & 9596 is erroneous i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Act either setting aside the AO's order under section 143(3) read with section 147 dtd 26.3.2002 or modifying the said order so as to rectify the aforesaid error for both assessment yeas. 3. Pursuant to such notice, the Commissioner passed order dated 1.3.2004 in which he directed the Assessing Officer to investigate the angle of increase in Gross Profit ratio. 4. The petitioner has challenged such notice on multiple grounds. Facts in both the petitions being identical, may not be separately .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3 of the Act. 3) The reasons recorded by the Commissioner were totally incorrect that once the Assessing Officer had disallowed the entire expenditure, the question of thereafter increasing the Gross Profit ratio would not arise. The addition would have automatic impact on the Gross Profit ratio. 6. Mr. Parikh for the Revenue, on the other hand, opposed the petition contending that the Commissioner had recorded proper reasons. The Assessing Officer had not ascertained the impact of fluctuating G .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said person were bogus. On such basis, the notice for reopening was issued. In the reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer referred to such search in case of F.H. Rizvi and the materials collected by the department during such search operations. Allegedly, the assessee had made purchases from three concerns i.e. F.F. Pharmaceuticals, R.K. Agencies and R.V. Chem and all these purchases, according to the Assessing Officer, were bogus. During the year under consideration 1993-1994, such total purc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Assessing Officer. He held that the statement of F.H. Rizvi included sales other than those made to Sun Pharma and that the assessee failed to establish that purchases from concerns of F.H. Rizvi were genuine. Interalia on such grounds, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire expenditure and added back the entire sum of ₹ 62.75 lacs. The contention of the assessee that if at all the purchases were bogus even the sales should be discarded, was rejected. 9. It can thus be seen that on th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version