TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : These appeals by the assessee are directed against the respective orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (ld. CIT(A) for short) and pertain to assessment years (A.Y. for short) 2009-10, 2010-11 2011-12. 2. The common issue raised is that ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of reopening and sustaining disallowance of following percent of bogus purchase : A.Y. Percentage Amount (in Rs.) 2009-10 12.5% 7,78,550/- 2010-11 6.5% 21,38,703/- 2011-12 12.5% 8,47,724/- 3. Since the facts are identic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perator, including in the case of above stated hawala operator and it was conclusively proved that these parties/operators were engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries only. These parties mostly indulged in following activities: a) issuing only bills and doing non-genuine business (Hawala Business); b) not maintaining stock and not keeping stock Register c) not effecting any purchase; and d) there was no transaction of goods. e) entries were being provided by the parties for commission. . 5. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, in order to ascertain the genuineness of purchases made by the assessee, the AO conducted independent inquiries and the assessee was asked to produce the par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have taken accommodation entry/bogus purchase bills during the concerned assessment year from different parties. Based upon this information assessment was reopened. 7. As regards the reopening of the assessee, on a careful consideration, we note that in this case information was received by the Assessing Officer from DGIT Investigation (Mumbai) there are some parties who are engaged in the hawala transactions and are also involved in issuing bogus purchase bills for sale of material without delivery of goods, which information was based on information received by Revenue from Maharashtra Sales Tax Authority. Information was received that the assessee was beneficiary of hawala accommodation entries from entry providers by way of bogus p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at income has escaped assessment. The information so received by the AO has live link with reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. On these incriminating tangible material information, assessment was reopened. At this stage there has to be prima facie belief based on some tangible and material information about escapement of income and the same is not required to be proved to the guilt. In this regard, we refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT(A) Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd, 291 ITR 500:- Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to lax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the validity of reopening in this case. Since, the issue has been decided on the basis of the Hon ble Apex Court decision, the other case laws referred by assessee are not supporting the assessee s case. 10. In such factual scenario, the assessing officer has made the necessary enquiry. The issue of notice to all the parties have returned unserved. Assessee has not been able to provide any confirmation from any of the party. Assessee has also not been able to produce any of the parties. Necessary evidence relating to transportation of the goods was also not on record. In this factual scenario, it is amply clear that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills. Mere preparation of documents for purchases cannot controvert overwhelm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition no 2860, order dt. 18.6.2014) has upheld 100% allowance for the purchases said to be bogus when the sales have not been doubted. However, the facts of that case were different. Furthermore, the sales in that case were basically to government departments. Hence, the ratio from this decision is not fully applicable on the facts of the case. 13. In these circumstances, the learned Departmental Representative has referred to Hon ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of Tax Appeal No. 240 of 2003 in the case of N K Industries vs. Dy. CIT vide order dated 20.06.2016, wherein 100% of the bogus purchases was held to be added in the hands of the assessee and tribunals restriction of the addition to 25% of the bogus purchases was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
