9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee challenging the order dated 10th April 2019, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. At the outset, Shri Madhur Agarwal, leaned Counsel for the assessee submitted that on the instructions of the assessee, he would not press ground no.3. Accordingly, ground no.3, is dismissed as not pressed. 3. In ground no.1, the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment indicating that steel purchased amounting to Rs. 14,80,433, from two parties are non-genuine as the concerned parties have been found to be providing accommodation bills. On the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer re-opened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to prove the genuineness of pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f assessment is bad-in-law as in the reasons recorded the Assessing Officer has referred to expenditure of Rs. 7,776, whereas, in the assessment order, he has treated the purchases of Rs. 14,80,433, as non-genuine. Thus, he submitted, the reasons recorded clearly reveal complete non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. 6. As regards the merits of the issue raised in ground no.2, the lean ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent that certain purchases claimed to have been made by the assessee during the year are non-genuine. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has tangible material in his possession to form a belief regarding escapement of income. Mentioning of a wrong figure in the reasons recorded, therefore, would not invalidate the proceeding. Therefore, I uphold the validity of re-opening of assessment under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
