TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d cannot be held as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue.That being the case, exercise of power under section 263 of the Act to revise the assessment order is neither justified nor valid. Accordingly, we are inclined to quash the impugned order passed by learned Principal Commissioner under section 263 of the Act. Ground raised by the assessee is allowed. - ITA no.2464, 2465 And 2466/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2009–10, 2010–11 And 2011–12) - - - Dated:- 16-8-2019 - SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessee by: Shri Amit C. Jhaveri Revenue by: Ms. Vidisha Kalra ORDER PER BENCH Captioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned the assessment under section 147 of the Act. In course of re assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to prove the genuineness of purchases of ₹ 4,13,91,177. In response to the query raised by the Assessing Officer, the assessee furnished certain documentary evidences. However, the Assessing Officer was not fully convinced with the evidences furnished by the assessee. Therefore, he wanted to independently ascertain the genuineness of purchases by conducting enquiry himself. Accordingly, he issued notices under section 133(6) of the Act to the concerned parties. However, all such notices returned back unserved. Thus, ultimately, the Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee has failed to prove the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue, since, in the decision referred it was held that once the purchases were found to be bogus, 100% addition should be made. Accordingly, he set aside the assessment order with certain directions. 6. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, purely on the basis of information obtained from the Sales Tax Department the purchases made by the assessee were treated as bogus. He submitted, in the course of assessment proceedings Assessing Officer had enquired into the purchases made and the assessee had produced evidences to prove the genuineness of purchases. Further, the Assessing Officer had conducted enquiry independently to verify the genuineness of the purchases. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , she submitted, the order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner is valid. 8. We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon. Undisputedly, in assessee s case originally the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act. However, subsequently, on the basis of information received by the Department from the Sales Tax Authorities indicating that certain parties from whom the assessee claimed to have made purchases have been identified as hawala operator by the Sales Tax Department, the Assessing Officer re opened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. During the re assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called upon th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he addition of the entire purchases. However, the facts involved in the present appeal are different as the basis of addition is the information received from outside source i.e., the Sales Tax Department. Even otherwise also, no fault can be found with the Assessing Officer in making addition by estimating profit on the non genuine purchases, as the same view has been expressed in various judicial precedents rendered in similar nature of dispute including the decisions of the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. In fact, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohommad Haji Adam Co. (supra) has held that even if the purchases are found to be bogus, however, the entire purchases cannot be added if the sales are not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
