9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction. 2. That, in view of the facts and circumstances, the order passed under section 154 of the Act is illegal, bad in law and cannot be justified by any material on record and the CIT(A) has also erred in upholding the same. 3. That CIT(A)/ AO , in view of the facts and circumstances of the case failed to appreciate that the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act after considering the relevant material and after appropriate reasoning hence there is no mistake apparent from record which can be rectified under section 154 of the Act therefore the notice U/s 154 and order passed are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 4. The addition/ disallowances made by the assessing officer are illegal, unjust, highly ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n facts and in law in making the ad-hoc addition/ disallowance on estimated basis, which is unjust, arbitrary, unlawful, highly excessive, based on surmises and conjectures and cannot be justified by any material on record. 10. The additions made and the observations made are unjust, unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjunctures. The additions made cannot be justified by any material on record. 11. That the explanation given evidence produced, material placed and available on record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions/ allowances made. 12. That the impugned Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Officer and order passed by CIT(A) are against the principles of n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 33,70,800/- being cash purchases be not made to the income in violation of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. 2.2 In response the assessee explained that there was no contravention of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act in respect of purchase of AP/MOP. As per the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings all the purchase vouchers were produced before the AO which were verifiable from the books of account. Besides the above, the persons from whom the goods were purchased were produced for examination and their statements on oath were recorded. The assessee further placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Banswari Lal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.). Further, on the poin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le issue, which itself amounts to review the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act and also stated that issues on merit are also squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Banwari Lal Bansidhar 229 ITR 299 (All.). To support his contentions, he also filed the copies of the following judgments:- - CIT vs. Smt. Santosh Jain 159 Taxman 392 (P&H) - ITO vs. Nardev Kumar Gupta 142 ITD 303 (Jai.) - CIT vs. Gayatri Glass Works 317 ITR 319 (All.) - M/s Mepco Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 319 ITR 208 (SC) - CIT vs. India Cements Ltd. 265 ITR 479 (Mad.) - CIT vs. Sherwani Sugar Syndicate Ltd. 294 ITR 247 (All.) - CIT vs. Lakahni Rubber Udyog Ltd. 312 ITR 14 (P&H) - ITO vs. V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were produced before the AO which were verifiable from the books of account. Besides the above, the persons from whom the goods were purchased were produced for examination and their statements on oath were recorded. The assessee further placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Banswari Lal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.). Further, on the point of GP, it was contended by the assessee that the AO at the time of assessment proceedings rejected the account books of the assessee u/s. 145 and increased the GP rate more than what had been shown by the assessee. Thus it was argued that if the books were rejected by the AO, Section 40A(3) of the Act would not be applicable. However, the AO rejected the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f everything and there was no need for the AO to make scrutiny of the amount incurred on the purchases by the assessee." 7.4 In the case of CIT vs. Gayatri Glass Works (2009) 317 ITR 319 (All), we find that the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad has observed that order passed on the basis of relevant facts - where a decision has been arrived at after considering the relevant material and after appropriate reasoning, although the reasoning and consequently the conclusion may be mistaken on facts or on law; and where to demonstrate the mistake of fact or of law it requires a process of detailed reasoning, it would not be a case of an error apparent on record capable of rectification under section 154, but would virtually amount to review of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
