9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt and duly disclosed and the amount has been paid through banking channels. The corresponding sales have also not been disputed including the directed expenses and the gross profit. This could be a case where assessee has made purchases in cash and has taken an accommodation bill for same quantity for which cheque amount has been issued. In such a case also, the source of purchase are from the books, therefore, the entire purchases cannot be treated as income of the assessee especially when books of account have not been rejected and sales and GP stands accepted in the trading account. It could be at best, a case of suppression of GP on the purchase. Profit element of such amount should be added as income. Accordingly, Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the assessee s case was reopened u/s.148 on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing, New Delhi, wherein it was mentioned that Maharashtra VAT Department has forwarded the details of non-genuine/bogus bill availed by the assessee during the year. The Investigation Wing had forwarded the copies of statements of concerned bogus billers (Hawala dealers) along with their TIN and PAN details of beneficiaries, wherein the assessee was also found to be one of the beneficiaries mentioned in the information. In the information, it was mentioned that assessee has taken bogus bill of ₹ 1,93,066/- from M/s. Supreme Enterprises. Based on this information, assessee s case was reopened u/s.147 and accordingly, notice u/s.148 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2010 issued in the favour of M/s. Belmarks Metal Works B-273, MIDC Malegaon, Sinner, Nasik, Mumbai, it was stated that TIN Number is 27500257887V dated 20.01.2009. However, Assessing Officer observed that as per the information provided by the DGIT (Inv.), Mumbai, M/s. Supreme Enterprises was also having the same TIN 27500257887V. Again, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee as to why the purchase of ₹ 1,93,066/- made from M/s. Supreme Enterprises be not treated as bogus. The assessee submitted and stated as under:- Please refer to Annexure-III, the assessee firm has no transaction with M/s Supreme Enterprises it appears that the reopening is purely based on information of Investigate Wing. Such a re-opening is bad in law as p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee. 5. Ld. CIT (A) after incorporating the assessment order has simply confirmed the assessment without even adjudicating either on legal issue or on merits. 6. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee is a manufacturer of cycle parts and has maintained regular books of account which is subjected to audit. As per the information received, it was stated that assessee has made purchases from M/s. Supreme Enterprises, whereas no such purchase was made from the said party. In fact, it was made from M/s. Krupa Trading Co and the purchases of ₹ 1,93,066/- has been duly disclosed in the books of account and corresponding sales and gross profit has been accepted, therefore, there was no occasion to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer should be confirmed. 8. After considering the aforesaid submissions and on perusal of the material placed on record, I find that on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing which was based on information forwarded by Maharashtra VAT Department that the assessee has availed Hawala entry of bogus bill purchases of ₹ 1,93,066/- in the financial year 2010-11. Based on this information, reopening has been done u/s.148. However, before the authorities below assessee s contention has been that, firstly, assessee has not made any purchases from M/s. Supreme Enterprises albeit it has made purchases from M/s. Krupa Trading Co. for the same tax invoice dated 19.07.2010 for sale of CRCA coil for ₹ 1,93 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that profit element of such amount should be added as income. Accordingly, Assessing Officer is directed to apply the GP declared by the assessee on purchase of ₹ 1,93,066/- and balance amount should be deleted. 9. In so far as validity of reopening u/s.148 is concerned, I do not find any merits in the contention of the ld. counsel for the reason that, firstly, there was a categorical information wherein the assessee s name was appearing along with details of the parties from whom the assessee has made purchases which were found to be Hawala operator providing accommodation bogus bills. The Assessing Officer after receiving the information has independently applied his mind and recorded his reason to believe as to why such a pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
