TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment of the assessee firm i.e, bogus purchases but had made independent additions in its hands i.e, addition of bogus purchases. We are of considered view, that as stated by the Ld. AR, and rightly so, now when no addition had been made by the Assessing Officer as regards the issue on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened i.e, bogus purchases therein, no independent addition could have made by him - See JET AIRWAYS (I) LTD. [ 2010 (4) TMI 431 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] as held that if after issuing the notice u/s.148 of the Act the Assessing Officer concludes that the income which had initially formed the reason to believe for reopening the case of the assessee, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, then i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned DCIT is not justified in making addition of ₹ 16,48,336/- which was not the basis for reopening the case u/s.148 as the alleged bogus purchase of Bitumen for ₹ 486910/- mentioned in the reason for reopening the case u/s.148 was not found to have been claimed or debited. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned DCIT is not justified in making addition of expense for purchase of Bitumen which has not been incurred by the appellant. 5. The appellant reserves the right to take any other grounds at the time of hearing. 2. Controversy involved in the present appeal hinges around the sustainability of the assessment order pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR, that though the case of the assessee was re-opened for the reason that it had procured bogus purchases bills of ₹ 4,86,910/- from M/s. Baba Basukinath Petrochemicals Ltd, Kolkata, however, no addition on the said count was made by the Assessing Officer while framing the assessment. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that though the Assessing Officer on the basis of the impugned information received from the ITO, Ward-1, Raigarh, had while framing the assessment alleged that the assessee had procured bogus purchases of ₹ 16,48,336/- from CUBs International Petrochem Ltd. (formerly known as M/s. Baba Basukinath Petrochemicals Ltd, Kolkata) and made an addition on the said count, however, no addition as regards the alleged bogus pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee filed return of income on 29.09.2008 declaring total income of ₹ 59,78,220/-. The case was scrutinized and assessment order u/s.143(3) of the IT Act was passed on 12.11.2010 determining total income at ₹ 60,38,220/-. Addition of ₹ 60,000/- was made on account of lump sum disallowances. During the course of further verification it was found that M/s. Baba Basukinath Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata has provided bogus bills for sale of Bitumin Emulsion to the assessee. In view of the above facts, the assesee has claimed bogus expenses of ₹ 4,86,910/- in the form of bogus purchases. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I have reason to believe that income of the assesee chargeable to tax to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Amount (Rs.) 1. CUBs International Petrochem Ltd 793/2007-08 10.03.2008 4,23,400 2. 792/2007-08 10.03.2008 4,23,400 3. 790/2007-08 09.03.2008 3,78,136 4. 762/2007-08 10.02.2008 4,23,400 Total 16,48,336/- Beyond doubt, the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve for reopening the case of the assessee, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, then it would not be open to the Assessing Officer to independently assess some other income. Similar view has also been taken by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT ( Asst.) Vs. Major Deepak Mehta (2012) 344 ITR 641 ( Chhattisgarh). 11. Considering the facts involved in the present case before us in light of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer without making any addition as regards the issue on the basis of which the case of the assessee was re-opened u/s.147 of the Act i.e, bogus purchases of ₹ 4,86,910/- (supra), had therein grossly eared in law in making an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
