TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 2048
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmission to add, alter or delete any of the other grounds on or before the completion of the appellate proceedings." 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of trading in waste paper. The assessee has shown total purchase of Rs. 15,26,48,678/- out of which Rs. 2,58,44,191/- is from registered dealers and Rs. 12,68,04,487/- were from unregistered dealers. On verification of details the Assessing Officer noted that purchases from the URD are not verifiable as no addresses and PAN of sellers parties given. Therefore, the assessee was asked to show cause why the books of accounts should not be rejected and why the 3% on total URD purchase amount should not b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Desai(HUF) (supra) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. 6. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed this appeal before this Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has made addition on account of gross profit by applying 3% rate of URD purchases. However, the Assessing Officer has not rejected the books of accounts u/s. 143(3) of the Act, therefore no addition can be made without rejection of the books of accounts as held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anil Kumar & Co. [2016] 67 Taxmann.com 278 (Karnataka) wherein it was held that where the books of accounts of the assessee had not been rejected and assessment having not been framed u/s. 144 of entire addition made by A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cord, further the assessee is dealing in waste paper in which the assessee is making purchases from various customers. Further the case law of Vijay Desai (HUF) (Supra) relied by the ld. Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A) is related to search and seizure action was carried out and incriminating material was found during the search indicating unrecorded purchases, therefore the same is distinguishable on the present facts of the case. Further, we find that the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anil Kumar & Co. [2016] 67 Taxmann.com 278 (Karnataka) wherein it was held that where the books of accounts of the assessee had not been rejected and assessment having not been framed u/s. 144 of entire addition made by Assessing officer....