2017 (4) TMI 1453

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s Objections against the appeal of the Revenue. 2. The Revenue in ITA No.2286/PUN/2016 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A)-1, Nashik was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 33,93,110/- on account of alleged bogus purchases from Hawala dealers/parties? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A)-1, Nashik was justified in deleting the addition on the basis of the section 292BB which is mainly for the reference to the notice issue? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A)-1, Nashik was justified in deleting the purchases treated as bogus on th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt without service of notice u/s 143(2), hence the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 30/03/2015 is bad in law and needs to be quashed. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the lower authorities have erred in relying on the statement of M/s, Jain Corporation recorded by Sales Tax Officials without giving any opportunity to the appellant to rebut, hence it is prayed to delete the addition based on such statement. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the lower authorities have erred in making the disallowance of purchase of a sum of Rs. 84,08,874/- by alleging that these purchases are made from alleged hawala parties by disregarding the entire documentary evidences place....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The Assessing Officer after recording reasons for reopening the assessment, had issued notice under section 148 of the Act. The assessee in reply, filed the return of income and asked for reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. The said reasons were supplied to the assessee, who filed objections against the said reasons. The Assessing Officer was required to dispose of objections by passing a separate and speaking order, which was not passed. The CIT(A) relied on the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Bayer Material Sciences Pvt. Ltd. in W.P. No.2502 of 2015, judgment dated 27.01.2016 and held that where the objections have not been disposed of by the Assessing Officer, then the assessment order pa....