2024 (2) TMI 1038

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,600/- being purchase as alleged to be from havala dealer without properly considering the submissions made by the appellant 2(a) The learned CIT(A)NFAC has erred in law and on facts in disallowing the claim of Rs. 40,34,868/- u/s 80-IC(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act 1961 in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of Income Tax Act 1961 dated 31st March, 2016 as against the same was allowed by his predecessors while passing the Assessment Order u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act 1961 dated 08th November, 2012 which being merely a change of opinion without having any additional new evidence and without considering the facts that the appellant has claimed deduction u/s 80-IC in earlier years and also in this Assessment Year which was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2015 to treat the original return of income filed as compliance to notice u/sec 148 of the Act . Further the AO has issued notice u/sec 143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act . In compliance to notice, the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from time to time and submitted the details and the case was discussed. 3. The assessee has submitted the available information in respect of purchases. The AO found that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills and to test check the genuineness of the transactions, the AO has issued notice u/sec 133(6) of the Act to the party and the said notice was returned un served with remark "Left" by the postal authorities. Hence the AO vide order sheet nothing dated 6-03-2016 has called for the additional deta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see has submitted information/details before the lower authorities and the books of accounts are maintained and the payments have been made through the banking channel. On the second disputed issue, the Ld.AR submitted that CIT(A) has erred in confirming the non allow ability of claim of deduction u/sec 80IC of the Act. Further in the original assessment order passed u/sec 143(3) of the Act on 08.11.2012, the AO has accepted the information filed by the assessee and allowed the claim of deduction u/sec 80IC of the Act. The Ld.AR submitted that the reasons for reopening of assessment was only with respect to the information received from DGIT (Inv) on the bogus purchases and not with respect to claim of deduction u/sec 80IC of the Act and it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....com 171)) and Hon'ble Gujarat High court in CIT Vs. Simit P Sheth (2013) (356 ITR 451) and to meet the ends of justice, set-aside the order of the CIT(A) on this disputed issue and direct the assessing officer to estimate the income @12.5% on unapproved/ bogus purchases and partly allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. 7. On the second disputed issue of denial of claim of deduction u/sec 80IC of the Act , the contentions of the Ld. AR that in the assessment proceedings u/sec 143(3) of the Act , the assessing officer has called for the details and the assessee has submitted the information in lieu of query and referred to the notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act dated 13.09.2012 at Point No. 33 "in respect of your claim of deduction u/s ....