TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 936
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts u/s 145 (3) of the income tax act 1961. 03 Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue for all these years are as under:- ITA. 5069/Del/2017 (Assessment year : 2008-09) : "1) The CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in law and on facts in allowing the appeal of the assessee without truly appreciating the factual matrix of the case. 2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in relying on Kabul Chawla 61 taxman.com 412 (Delhi) and in holding that completed assessment could not have been interfered by the AO by making the assessment u/s 153A of the Act does not stipulates any such conditionality. In the relied case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla, ITA No. 707/2014 and others dated 28.08.2015 (2015) 61 taxman.com 412 (Delhi) departments SLP is pending in Supreme Court and decision is still awaited. 3) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 79,57,01,894/- made by AO on account of bogus purchase. 4) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in accepting assessee contention that the Supplier of goods have submitted the reply/confirmation in respect to notice u/s 133(6) when the Assessing Officer specifically ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the assessment records or referring the matter to AO is clear violation of rule 46A of the I.T. Act being additional evidence accepted in appellate proceedings. 5) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,20,40,153/- made by AO on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB(4) of the Act. 6) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 84,54,928/-on account of disallowance of manufacturing expenses. 7) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts allowing assessee's plea for rejection of books of account u/s 145(3) of the IT act, 1961. 8) (a) The order of the CIT(Appeals) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts; (b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. " ITA. 5070/Del/2017 (Assessment year : 2010-11) : "1) The CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in law and on facts in allowing the appeal of the assessee without truly appreciating ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... could not have been interfered by the AO by making the assessment u/s 153A of the Act does not stipulates any such conditionality. In the relied case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla, ITA No. 707/2014 and others dated 28.08.2015 (2015) 61 taxman.com 412 (Delhi) departments SLP is pending in Supreme Court and decision is still awaited. 3) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 17,64,47,250/- made by AO on account of bogus purchase from M/s. A.K. Trading Co. and from M/s. Om Trading Co. 4) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in accepting assessee contention that the Supplier of goods have submitted the reply/confirmation in respect to notice u/s 133(6) when the Assessing Officer specifically mentioned that no reply were filed in response to notice u/s 133(6), therefore, assumption of the contention that they have filed the reply without verifying from the assessment records or referring the matter to AO is clear violation of rule 46A of the I.T. Act being additional evidence accepted in appellate proceedings. 5) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts in deleting the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....izure operation u/s 132 of the income tax act was conducted by the investigation wing of the department on 20/01/2014 on M/s Sharp group of cases. The business premises of the assessee were also covered. The main allegation against the sharp group was that it shows bogus profit in its tax exempt entities which are claiming exemptions u/s 80 IB of the income tax act. It was also the allegation that the profit shown were on papers only on that very high-volume to claim deduction. The second allegation was the generation of unaccounted money where the market information with the Department shows that the most of the purchase and sales are out of books. Therefore notice u/s 153A of the income tax were act was issued to the assessee on 13/3/2000 4015 in response to the said notice the assessee filed return of income on 6/4/2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 480/-. 05 Based on the above information and after the detailed enquiry the learned assessing officer made an addition on account of disallowance of the bogus purchases on protective basis in the hands of the assessee of Rs. 795,701,894/- and addition on the substantive basis was made in the hands of the sharp global. The disall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....corded the entire purchase in the books of accounts, stock register is, VAT returns and excise returns et cetera. He also allowed the deduction u/s 80 IB of the income tax act to the assessee holding that unit of the assessee as an industrial undertaking which is purchased from a trillion carried manufacturing activities at its plants and further for the reason that deduction u/s 80 IB which was already allowed to the assessee in previous assessment years that is to thousand six - 07 to 2010 - 11 therefore the present disallowance of deduction u/s 80 IB (4) of Rs. 157,62,249 was also allowed. The disallowance of various expenditure of Jammu unit was also allowed by the learned CIT - A as he has held that there are manufacturing activities carried on by the assessee. Accordingly appeal of the assessee was allowed. 07 The revenue is aggrieved with the order of the learned CIT - A and therefore in this appeal. Adverting to the facts of the case the learned CIT DR vehemently submitted that the learned CIT - A as incorrectly held that if there is no incriminating material found during the course of search, no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee. She submitted that the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment year 2008 - 09 to assessment year 2011 - 12 and appeal of the revenue for all these years are dismissed. 12 Coming to the assessment year 2012 - 13 the learned assessing officer has made disallowance of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 424,341,000/- on protective basis in the hands of the assessee and on substantive basis the addition is made in the hands of another assessee M/s sharp global Ltd for the reason that assessee unit is being shown as hundred percent captive unit of sharp global Ltd with hundred percent supplies made to that entity by the assessee. Therefore, the assessing officer has made substantive addition in the hence of the beneficiary, and protective addition in the hands of the assessee. The order was passed by the learned assessing officer under the provisions of Section 153A read with Section 143 (3) of the income tax act on 31st of March 2016. Wherein he made the disallowance of bogus purchases of Rs. 424,341,000 as protective basis in the hence of the assessee. Further the disallowance of manufacturing expenses of Rs. 552,505 also made for the reason that AO was of the view that assessee is not carrying on any manufacturing activity and it was....