Reopening of assessment and accommodation entry allegations in reassessment: reopening sustained but additions for unexplained credits deleted

Validity of reopening under assessment provisions was challenged where initial information and reasons recorded varied; ITAT applied the principles of reasoned recorded consideration and change of opinion, finding the AO had applied mind and correctly invoked reassessment, with reopening sustained. On allegation of accommodation entries/unexplained cash credit arising from sales to a related purchaser, ITAT noted books were maintained, sale proceeds received through banking, profit element offered to tax and GST returns disclosed the transactions; absence of evidence of routing unaccounted income or rejected accounts led to deletion of additions made by the AO.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the reopening of assessment under sections 147/148 read with section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was validly initiated and sustained. (ii) Whether the addition of Rs. 4,34,09,924 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 (and related addition under Section 69) was justified.

Issue (i): Validity of reopening of assessment under sections 147/148 r.w. 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: Reasons recorded referred to information from investigation indicating provision of accommodation entries by a third party and specific transaction details matching the assessee's records; the Assessing Officer issued show-cause, considered the assessee's reply and passed an order under section 148A(d) before framing assessment under section 148. The recorded reasons and the order under section 148A(d) demonstrate application of mind to the material on file.

Conclusion: The reopening of assessment is valid and is upheld against the challenge.

Issue (ii): Legitimacy of adding the entire sale consideration of Rs. 4,34,09,924 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 and related addition under Section 69.

Analysis: The assessee's books disclosed the sales, banking receipts and the profit element was offered to tax; books of account were not rejected and there was no evidence that unaccounted income was routed through the sales. Even if sales were found to be bogus, undisputed purchases indicate the possibility that stock was sold to other parties; therefore only the profit element could be subject to tax rather than the entire sale consideration.

Conclusion: The addition of the entire sale consideration is not justified and is deleted; consequential addition under Section 69 is also deleted.

Final Conclusion: The reopening of assessment is sustained while the substantive additions of the entire sale consideration and related unexplained expenditure are deleted, resulting in the appeal being partly allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where books of account are not rejected and the profit element on disclosed transactions has been offered to tax, an addition cannot be sustained by taxing the entire sale consideration; at best only the profit element may be added when sales are alleged to be bogus.

---