TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 43
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3-04) "1. "That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,72,36,944/- made by the A.O on account of bogus purchases made by the assessee from M/s Kashish Products Impex Pvt. Ltd. C.O .No.-39/DEL/2015 (A.Y. 2003-04) "1. "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in not holding that notice u/s 148 issued in this case is illegal, void without jurisdiction and barred by limitation and accordingly the said notice and the assessment order passed on the foundation of such notice is liable to the quashed. I.T.A .No.-1813/DEL/2011 (A.Y. 2004-05) 1. "That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ogus purchases were made by the assessee Company from M/s Kashish Impex Pvt. Ltd and the information received was for the period 17/09/2002 to 20/5/2005. The amount of bogus purchase for the period under consideration amounted to Rs. 1.64 crore. The case was reopen u/s 147 and notice u/s 148 of the Income tax Act was issued on 12/2/2009. In response to the said notice the assessee company submitted that it has already filed its return of income on 20/11/2003 and assessment was complete du/s 143(3) and further submitted that the same may be treated as return filed in response to notice issued u/s 148. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 22/9/2009 and in response to that, the assessee requested the Assessing Officer to provide copy of reasons rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the Ld. AR was that the same person as Assessing Officer who recorded the reasons for re-opening should issue the notice under Section 148 and whereas the reasons for reopening were recorded by one person and the notice u/s. 148 was given by a different person. He relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. v. CIT (Delhi) 2009 308 ITR 38 for this preposition. The third contention of the Ld. AR is that Section 151 was not complied in all three assessment years as sanction for the re-opening of assessment has to be given by the CIT and that proper and specific satisfaction was not given. He submitted that the sanction was given in a mechanical manner, without proper application o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing of assessment made by ACIT or ITO is in respect of their technical jurisdiction and is matter of administrative conveyance for which the Tribunal cannot interfere. 12. The Ld. DR further submitted that the reasons to believe is properly given by the Assessing Officer while re-opening the assessment. 13. We have perused all the records and heard both the parties. The undisputed fact is that the notice u/s. 148 was issued beyond the period of four years from the end of the Assessment Year in all the three cases. On the perusal of reasons recorded which are extracted hereinafter, we find that there is no whisper or an allegation that the assessee failed to make a full and true disclosure of all material fact necessary for assessment in i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s. 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961. A.Y. 2005-06 Return declaring Nil Income was filed by assessee on 08.10.2005. Assessment u/s. 143(3) was completed on 22.12.2006 at a total loss of Rs. 1,81,99,014/-. Information was received from DRI. Regional Unit Jaipur and passed on this office that Central Excise Commissioner, Jaipur 1 detected bogus purchase made by assessee company from M/s. Kashish Impex Pvt. Ltd. and the information received for the period 17.9.02 to 20.05.05 and the amount of purchases (bogus) for the period under consideration amounted to Rs. 74.08 lakh In view of the above, I have reason to believe that income to the tune of Rs. 74.08 lakh has escaped taxation. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Haryana Acrylic Manu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of proviso to s. 147 makes it more than clear that where the provisions of s. 147 are being invoked after the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, in addition to the AO having reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, it must also be established as a fact that such escapement of assessment has been occasioned by either the assessee failing to make a return under s. 139, etc. or by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. In the present case, the only question is with regard to the second portion of the proviso, which relates to failure on the part of the assessee to discl....