AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (8) TMI 21
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment u/s 147/143(3) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making disallowance of Rs. 52,50,000/- on account of purchases of PGSM Software Module from M/s B.T. Technet Ltd. by treating the same as non-genuine and that too without independent application of mind and by recording incorrect facts and findings and without providing opportunity of cross examination. 4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, impugned disallowance and impugned assessment order are bad in law, illegal, unjustified, contrary to facts & law and based upon recording of incorrect facts and finding, without giving adequate opportunity of hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be quashed. 5. That the appellant craves to leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: Assessee filed its original return of income on 01.11.2004 decl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompanies and is operating a number of banks accounts either by himself or in the name of his relatives and close associates. Shri S.K Gupta through the companies controlled by him was found to be engaged in the business of issuing accommodation bills on commission basis and also issuing entries for share capital. No evidence was found during the search that any substantial business activity was being carried on through these companies. .In fact, a large numbers of bills issued to various companies were found and seized from the premises of Shri Gupta and most of them were for providing professional/Consultancy services. It is pertinent to mention here that Shri Gupta in his statements recorded on Oath u/s 132/131 of the I.T Act had admitted that he was just issuing accommodation bills to various companies. It was also admitted by him that his companies were neither having the necessary competence nor the infrastructure to provide such professional/consultancy services .During the course of search at 231 Gulmohar Enclave, one of the premises of Shri S.K Gupta, various incriminating documents have been found. These documents also include the sales bills issued by M/s BT Technet Ltd, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ineer Ltd Pashupati Fabrics etc, who themselves are having their own infrastructures for IT related requirements, have approached the assessee as well as its other related group companies for getting accommodation bills. But surprisingly none of them had any corroborative evidence other than the sale bills or in some cases a general agreement, without any supporting evidences of software development. Even assessee had no supporting documents of purchase or outsourcing, where from it could issue sale bills to these corporate or other desirous companies/concerns. (i) The assessee has failed to correlate its surrender income, in different assessment years, with the actual deficiencies of the business relevant to accommodation entry business on account of providing accommodation sale bills, expenses bills in the form of job work charges, advertisement charges, web designing charges and providing investment entries. (ii) The assessee has infact indulged in accommodation entries business and has not done any genuine business. So the income of the assessee from the accommodation entry business, is computed @ 2%, net rate on sale turnover and investment turnover in view of the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r hardware and accessories, communication, process control and office automation and high-end security equipments. It has been submitted that, core business is of building defence infrastructure for government of India. He submitted that it was at instance of Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India that assessee had supplied "Complete laptop-based 16 channels PGSM interceptor system". 8. Ld. Counsel submitted that original assessment for year under consideration was completed on 22.12.2006 under section 143(3) of the Act. Thereafter, assessment was reopened vide notice under section 147 of the Act, dated 27.01.2009. Ld. Counsel challenged reassessment proceedings on 3 counts: i) it has been submitted that assessee has not been served with notice under section 143(2) of the Act which is evident from reply received in lieu of RTI application, dated 27.01.2014 and that assessing officer has not discharged its onus of establishing that income has escaped assessment by way of materials on record. He placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT vs Society of World Wide Inter Ban, Financial Telecommunication reported in 323 ITR 249 and decisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued. He thus argued that assessing officer has rightly assumed jurisdiction in reopening assessment in case of assessee before us. Ld. DR placed reliance upon orders passed by authorities below. 12. In reply to submissions of Ld. DR, Ld. Counsel submitted that assessee filed returns in response to notice under section 147. Ld. Counsel placed reliance upon letter dated 27.11.2009 placed at page 100 of paper book, wherein details in respect of purchase of software from BT Technet, along with audited report and acknowledgement of return for assessment year under consideration has been submitted to have been tendered. He further argued that, even if it is assumed that no return in response to notice under section 147 has been filed, then assessing officer could not have completed re assessment. He submitted that merely because in the reassessment order, there is no mention regarding filing of returns in lieu of notice under section 147, it cannot be assumed that no returns have been filed by assessee in response to notice under section 147 of the Act. 13. We have produced the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us and judgments relied upon by Ld.....