TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 353
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs.1,85,53,063/-. A search and seizure operation was carried out in the business premises of the assessee on 9-10-2002. Subsequent to the search an assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) on 27-3-2003 accepting the return filed by the assessee for the assessment year under dispute i.e. 2000-01. In consequence of search and seizure operation, block assessment proceedings for the block period 1997-98 to 2002-03 was initiated. In course of block assessment proceedings, the AO while examining the books of accounts of the assesseee found that one particular purchase amounting to Rs.1,67,48,192/- made from Essar Steels has been recorded twice in the books of account once in the month of March, 2000 and again in the month of April, 2000. The block....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....however did not concede to the request of the asseseee on the ground that the assessee had preferred an appeal before the CIT (A) only challenging the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234D. As has been observed by the AO that the assessee had placed a purchase order with Essar Steels in the month of March 2000 but the same was received in the month of April, 2000. It has been observed by the AO that in the note appended to the computation of income filed along with revised return for assessment year 2000-01, the assessee submitted that since the value of purchases of Rs.1,67,48,192 representing the goods in transit which were to be added to the closing stock but was not added and the revised return was filed offering the amount to tax for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee had submitted that an amount of Rs.1.67 crores cannot be considered in the block assessment proceedings since it is a subject matter of regular assessment. On the aforesaid contention of the assessee when the assessment for the assessment year 2000-01 was reopened, the assessee filed a revised return voluntarily offering to tax the amount of Rs.1.67 crores. The AO also completed the assessment accepting the return filed by the assessee. The CIT (A) after considering the contentions of the assessee, allowed the appeal on the following observations:- "4. I have considered the submissions made by the appellant, gone through the order of the AO and also the legal opinion on the issue. As brought out by the AR the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stified in the instant case. 7. On the contrary, the learned AR for the assessee submitted that it is neither case of concealment of income nor furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. It is a simple case of bona fide mistake committed by Accountant in recording the same purchases twice in the books of account. The learned AR contended that this mistake could not be detected even by the Auditors at the time of statutory audit as well as tax audit when it came to the notice of the assessee, it immediately filed revised return voluntarily offering Rs.1.67 crores as income and also paid tax on it. The learned AR contended that when the AO has accepted the income declared in the revised return while completing the assessment u/s 143(3) r....