9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the fact that assessee made a formal request to the lower authorities. In our considered opinion and after considering the aforesaid judgment, no addition can be made on the basis of which violate principle of natural justice. - ITA. No: 301/AHD/2018 - - - Dated:- 26-6-2019 - SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by: Shri P. F. Jain, AR Respondent by: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad dated 19.01.2018 pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12 and following grounds have been taken: 1. The ld. C.IT.(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 submitted to be bad-in-law and on fact inasmuch as requisite conditions for re-opening were not satisfied. 2. The Id.C.IT.(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not quashing and holding the reassessment order as invalid inasmuch as the reassessment order passed was without assuming proper ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e addition of ₹ 2.90 crore. 4. Against the said order, assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and before him, assessee took the plea that statement of Shri P.K. Jain has not been supplied to him despite of the fact that he made the request to the ld. A.O but to no avail and ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. 5. We have gone through the relevant record and impugned order. The lower authorities have made addition on the basis of investigation carried out in the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain where Shri P.K. Jain has admitted that he was indulged in providing entries to various companies and assessee has received accommodation entry in the form of share application money/share premium from various paper companies controlled and managed by Shri P.K. Jain. The assessee has specifically requested for the statement of Shri P.K. Jain to the A.O. but ld. A.O. did not supply the same. 6. In support of its contention, assessee cited a judgment of Delhi High Court in the matter of Principal CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. wherein appeal of the revenue was dismissed by the Hon ble Delhi High Court on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot reasons but conclusions of AO one after other-There was no independent application of mind by AO to tangible material which formed basis of reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment- Reasons failed to demonstrate link between tangible material and formation of reason to believe that income had escaped assessment-Revenue's appeal dismissed. 7. Ld. A.R. also cited a judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the matter of Varshaben Sanatbhai Patel vs. ITO wherein similar circumstances, plea of the assessee was accepted. Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Non-disclosure of primary facts (Information from external source) - Assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 - For relevant assessment years, assessee filed its returns declaring certain taxable income -Returns were processed under section 143(1) - Subsequently, on basis of information received from DGIT (Inv.) that assessee made bogus purchases and to said extent income had escaped assessment from tax, Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 seeking to reopen, assessment - Assessee's objections to reopening of assessment were set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... note that in the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority he has specifically mentioned that such an opportunity was sought by the assessee. However, no such opportunity was granted and the aforesaid plea is not even dealt with by the Adjudicating Authority, As far as the Tribunal is concerned, we find that rejection of this plea is totally untenable. The Tribunal has simply stated that cross-examination of the said dealers could not have brought out any material which would not be in possession of the appellant themselves to explain as to why their ex-factory prices remain static. It was not for the Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross-examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them. As mentioned above, the appellant had contested the truthfulness of the statements of these two witnesses and wanted to discredit their testimony for which purpose it wanted to avail the opportunity of cross- examination. That apart, the Adjudicating Authority simply relied upon the price list as maintained at the depot to determine the price for the purpose of levy of excise duty. Whether the goods were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
