2021 (9) TMI 639

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in appeal and cross objection are similar basing on the same identical facts. The ld. AR requested us to take up cross objection first, therefore, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to hear cross objection and appeal together and to pass a consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take up the cross objection by the assessee in CO No. 04/PUN/2018 for the A.Y. 2009-10. 4. We note that this appeal was filed with a delay of 304 days. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay. After hearing both the parties, we find that the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which really prevented the assessee to file the present appeal in time. Therefore, the delay of 304 days are con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee has taken accommodation entry which was not declared in the return of income. Having noticed the AO reopened the assessment relating to the year under consideration and added the said amount in the assessment proceedings and initiated penalty proceedings having satisfied that the assessee furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. He argued that the decision in the case of Samson Pernchery reported in 98 CCH 39 (Bom.) is distinguishable on facts and heavily relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Snita Transport (P.) Ltd. reported in 42 taxmann.com 54 (Gujarat) and prayed to dismiss the grounds raised by the assessee in cross objection. 8. Heard both the parties and perused the material a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laim of bogus purchases/Hawala parties relevant purchases by producing relevant documents. He treated the above said amount as unexplained purchases and added to the total income of the assessee. Further, he recorded that the assessee had filed inaccurate particulars of income to an extent of the above said amount and initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We note that in reassessment order at Para No. 10 the AO recorded satisfaction that the assessee had filed inaccurate particulars of income but the notice was issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for both the charges. The contention of the ld. AR is that when the AO satisfied on one charge and issuance of notice for both the charges is patently wrong. He relied on....