9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal : "1. That the order u/s.147 read with section 143(3) passed by the learned DCIT is illegal, invalid and bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining addition f Rs. 16,48,336/- made by the learned DCIT on the alleged ground of bogus purchase of Bitumen which is duly confirmed to have been purchased and used in the contract work by the subcontractor and contractee department. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned DCIT is not justified in making addition of Rs. 16,48,336/- which was not the basis for reopening the case u/s.148 as the all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... horized Representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the Ld. AR to drive home his contentions. Before us, the Ld. AR has assailed the validity of the additions made by the Assessing Officer vide the assessment framed by him under Section 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act, dated 30.03.2016. Elaborating on his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR, that though the case of the assessee was re-opened for the reason that it had procured bogus purchases bills of Rs. 4,86,910/- from M/s. Baba Basukinath Petrochemicals Ltd, Kolkata, however, no addition on the said count was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the reassessment order and the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 9. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid issue in hand in the backdrop of the orders of the lower authorities and the contentions advanced by the ld. Authorized representatives for both the parties before us. Before adverting any further, we think it apt to cull out the 'reasons to believe' on the basis of which the case of the assessee was re-opened by the Assessing Officer, which read as under: "The assessee filed return of income on 29.09.2008 declaring total income of Rs. 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 Rs. 60,38,220/-. Addition of Rs. 60,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imed by the assessee to have been made from aforementioned party, viz. M/s. Baba Basukinath Petrochemicals Ltd, Kolkata. On a perusal of the bifurcated details of the aforementioned purchases of bitumin emulsion of Rs. 16,48,336/- (supra), we find that the same reads as under: Sl. No. Name of concern/party from where bitumen emulsion has purchased during FY 2007-08 Bill No. Date 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 Officer had not made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee, 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 Rs. 4,86,910/- (supra), had therein grossly eared in law in making an independent addition of Rs. 16,48,336/- (s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
