9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... six transactions and the same has remained unexplained and the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of this transaction and also the source of income. AO however, has accepted the explanation tendered by the petitioner in respect of all the six transactions except observing that the assessee did not furnish the Sales and Purchase Register and therefore, the source for sales and purchase is not known ignoring the fact that the petitioner has filed the return of income for the year under consideration along with audit report and audited balance sheet and Profit and Loss Account. Petition is allowed. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) No. 1: Mr SN Divatia (1378). For the Respondent(s) No. 1 : Mr Karan Sanghani For Mrs Kalpana K Raval (1046) ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA) 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. S.N. Divatia for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Karan Sanghani for learned advocate Ms. Kalpana K. Raval for the respondent. 2. Having regard to the issue involved in this petition which is in a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the year under consideration and in this regard, the assessee furnished the sum of party wise sales figures as per GSTR data. However, the assessee has not furnished the sales register of the period under consideration. Hence, the income corresponding to the sale transaction of Rs. 59,80,84,806/- being represented in the form of assets as defined in explanation to Section 149 of the Act has escaped assessment. iv) As per the information in GSTR data the assessee has made purchases of Rs. 66,22,73,034/- during the year under consideration. In this regard, the assessee has furnished the sum of party wise purchase data of the period under consideration. The assessee has not furnished the purchase register and therefore, the source of purchases of Rs. 66,33,73,034/- being represented in the form of assets as defined in explanation to Section 149 of the Act has escaped assessment. v) In respect to the sale of Mutual Funds of Rs. 8,17,919/- the assessee has furnished the Excel sheet of the sale of Mutual funds and stated that sale has been made by the partners and during the year assessee firm has not sold any mutual funds. vi) In respect to Transaction of Rs. 9,71,156/- with Mitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 148A (b) of the Act. 13. It was submitted that while passing the order under section 148A (d) of the Act, respondent Assessing Officer has only recorded that the petitioner did not furnish the purchase register or sales register and only because of non-furnishing of the purchase and sale register, it was concluded that there is escapement of income of Rs. 126,03,57,840/- and to arrive at such conclusion there is no application of mind on the part of respondent Assessing Officer. It was pointed out by learned advocate Mr. Divatia that along with the reply, the petitioner has furnished all the summary of purchase report in GSTR-1 filed with GST department and has also submitted required details by submitting party-wise sales report and purchase report with the GST department. It was therefore, submitted that the contention raised by respondent Assessing Officer to come to the conclusion that it is a fit case for reopening the assessment is without jurisdiction ignoring the explanation tendered by the petitioner in absence of any escapement of income. It was submitted that the respondent was supposed to come to conclusion on the basis of information that it is a fit case to reo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer in para no.4 of the impugned order has discussed each of the above information and thereafter come to the conclusion that notice under section 148 is required to be issued. 17. In rejoinder, learned advocate Mr. Divatia submitted that respondent has failed to show from the details submitted in the notice as well as the impugned order by only referring to sum of party-wise sales and purchase reported in GSTR-I and there is no reference to any particular information for escapement of income. 18. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the facts of the case, from the reasons given by the respondent for reopening in notice under section 148A (b) of the Act, it is apparent that there is total non application of mind on part of the respondent Assessing Officer to come to the conclusion that it is a fit case for reopening the assessment. 19. On perusal of the order passed under section 148A (d) of the Act, it is revealed with regard to the payment of contractor to A.S Yarn Tex Private Limited that respondent Assessing Officer has taken note of the ledger as well as the clarificatory letter issued by A.S Yarn Tex Private Limited. Sim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
