TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 7
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed its return of income for assessment year 2009-10 on 27.09.2009 declaring total income at Rs.Nil. Subsequently, the case was reopened u/s. 147, by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 08.03.2014 and served upon the assessee, based on the information received from the DGIT (Inv.), Mumbai, that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries of the accommodation entries provided by some of the MVAT dealers who were indulging in issuing bogus sale/purchase bills, which was investigated and kept on the public domain by the Sales Tax Department. Assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the I. T. Act, 1961 was completed by the Assessing Officer on 14.03.2015 determining the total income at Rs. 3,06,670/-. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed out to Rs. 3,06,674/-, and added to the total income of the assessee. 5. Against the above order, the assessee appealed before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) challenging both the reopening as well as merits of addition. 6. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the reopening as well as merits of the addition. 7. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. I have heard the learned departmental representative and perused the records. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice. 9. As regards the reopening of the assessee, on a careful consideration, I note that in this case information was received by the Assessing Officer from DGIT Investigation (Mumbai) there are so....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ivery of any material. There is a list of such parties wherein the assessee is stated to be beneficiary of bogus purchase bills. 10. From the above, I find that tangible and cogent incriminating material were received by the AO which clearly showed that the assessee was beneficiary of bogus purchase entries from bogus entry providers which formed the reason to believe by the AO that income has escaped assessment. The information so received by the AO has live link with reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. On these incriminating tangible material information, assessment was reopened. At this stage there has to be prima facie belief based on some tangible and material information about escapement of income and the same is no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ely prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co, (P.) Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597 (Supreme Court): Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court)." 11. The above discussion and precedent from Apex Court fully justify the validity of reopening in this case. Further I find that the Ld. CIT(A) has carefully examined the issue and has properly appreciated the issue. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the same. Accordingly, I uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of reopening. Since, the issue has been decided on the basis of the Hon'ble Apex Court decision, the other cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the assessee. All these notices have returned unserved. Assessee has not been able to produce any of the parties. The assessing officer has noted that there is no cogent evidence of the provision of goods. Neither the assessee has been able to produce any confirmation from these parties. In such circumstances, there is no doubt that these parties are non-existent. 13. Hence purchase bills from these non-existent the/bogus parties cannot be taken as cogent evidence of purchases, in light of the overwhelming evidence the revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 and Durga Prasad More 82 ITR ....