9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 501X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Department. 2. Petitioner challenged that order before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which came to be dismissed by an order pronounced on 5th October, 2018. Petitioner raised a grievance before ITAT that CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 12.5% disallowance on account of bogus purchases and also in upholding the validity of re-opening. In the Appeal before ITAT various grounds were raised including the challenge to re-opening itself. According to Petitioner there was no tangible material. Moreover Petitioner also alleged that reliance has been placed upon information received by Revenue from Maharashtra Sales Tax Authority that Assessee was beneficiary of Hawala accommodation entries from entry provider by way of bogus purchase. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t addition should be restricted to differences between the gross profit rate on alleged bogus purchases and the undisputed purchases. This Misc. Application came to be dismissed by an order pronounced on 11th October, 2019. 5. As regards the Petitioner's grievance that the evidences /statements collected from the accommodation entry provider has not been provided, ITAT has not even dealt with that objection. As regards Bombay High Court's judgment relied upon, ITAT says that it was a subsequent order and therefore it could not be stated that there was an error apparent from record. 6. The Apex Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Limited [2008] 173 Taxman 322 (SC) in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive overruling'. It is based on the philosophy: "The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration". It may, however, be stated that this is an exception to the general rule of the doctrine of precedent. 45. Rectification of an order stems from the fundamental principle that justice is above all. It is exercised to remove the error and to disturb the finality. 46. In S. Nagaraj & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, 1993 Supp (4) SCC 595, Sahai, J. stated: "15. Justice is a virtue which transcends all barriers. Neither the rules of procedure nor technicalities of law can stand in its way. The order of the Court should not be prejudicial to anyone. Rule of stare decisis is adhered for consistency but it is not as inflex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
