TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... odation entries. Through the reasons, now he wishes to add the entire amount holding a belief that such sum represents the petitioner's undisclosed income. We are not called upon to decide whether the AO's first approach of taxing only the profit element embedded in bogus purchases was correct or that his later approach of taxing the entire bogus purchases is correct. What we are called upon to judge is whether in facts of the present case, he can change his basis of assessing the income. In clear terms, once the Assessing Officer noticed the factum of bogus purchases and accommodation entries and in scrutiny assessment, taxed the same in the manner he thought was appropriate, he cannot be allowed to shift the stand by issuing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Shri. Bhanwarlal Jain and group entities. The Assessing Officer passed order of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act for short) on 9.2.2016 in which he had added a sum of ₹ 45.14 lacs (rounded off) to the total income of the assessee arrived by applying profit ratio of 9.20% out of bogus purchases and accommodation entires was ₹ 4.90 crore (rounded off). (b). To reopen such assessment, he issued the impugned notice which as can be seen, was done beyond the period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. In order to do so, he had recorded following reasons:- In the instant case, the assessee e-filed its ROI on 28.9.2011 declaring total income at &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 35/- has escaped assessment and is to be brought to tax in the hands of M/s. Dimexon Diamons Ltd for A.Y. 2012-13. (c). Upon being supplied the reasons, the petitioner raised objections to the notice of reopening of assessment under letter dated 9.10.2018. Said objections were rejected by the Assessing Officer on 15.11.2018. Copy of this order was received by the petitioner on 21.11.2018. The Assessing Officer passed the order of assessment on 12.12.2018. The petitioner has challenged the notice of reopening of assessment. By way of amendment, he has also added a challenge to the order of assessment passed pursuant to such notice. 3. The record would suggest that the Assessing Officer passed the order of asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without jurisdiction. Therefore, we are now at the pre-assessment order stage. 5. On merits of the petitioner's challenge to the impugned notice, we may recall that the factum of the petitioner being beneficiary of bogus purchase bills and accommodation entries was within the knowledge of the Assessing Officer even during the original scrutiny assessment. He therefore, passed the order of assessment in which he added a sum of ₹ 45.14 lacs to the income of the assessee by taking profit ration of 9.20% on the total bogus purchases and accommodation entries. Through the reasons, now he wishes to add the entire amount holding a belief that such sum represents the petitioner's undisclosed income. We are not called up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
