TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 238
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 (A) 2. The facts in all appeals are common and both the Ld. Counsel of the assessee and the Ld. CIT, DR agreed to that and the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, thereafter, took up the appeal for Assessment Year 2018- 19 as the lead case. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee argued that multiple grounds of appeal have been filed by the assessee and, thereafter, finally, vide letter dated 12.05.2025, the fresh grounds of appeal have been filed and vide letter dated 10.05.2025 as filed during the course of hearing, the Ld. Counsel sought to withdraw the original grounds of appeal as filed along with the Form No.36, revised grounds of appeal filed on 27.02.2025 vide letter dated 22.02.2025 and additional grounds of appeal filed on 10.05.2025.For the sake of convenience, the revised grounds of appeal as filed by the appellant vide letter dated 12.05.2025 are being reproduced as under: 1. On the facts and in law, the approval granted by the ld. Addl. CIT under Section 148B is illegal and unsustainable, as a single approval order dated 30.03.2023 was issued for all three assessment years-AYs 2018-19 to 2020-21 vide letter no.2384. 2. That the approval gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as under bearing ITA No. 921/Chd/2024: 1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was justified to restricted the addition made by the A.O on account of suppression of sales of Rs. 11,77,50,000/- to 1,13,70,000/- by directing AO to consider average annual power consumption per MT for six years by ignoring the fact that authenticity of average annual power consumption data before the date of search was not established/authenticated and also ignoring the statement of Sh. Kunwar Vijyant, factory chemist and Sh. Santokh Singh, Accountant in which they had described the consumption of electricity units for the production of 1 tonne of metal of finished products? 2. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,63,80,000/- by applying the average of annual power consumption for the six years instead of monthly average calculated by the A.O. on the basis of seized material and made addition u/s 69A of the Act accordingly? 3. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Plant vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383, it was requested for admission of additional grounds of appeal as per letter dated 12.05.2025. The Ld. CIT(DR) did not raise any objection to the same and, accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is being decided on the basis of the grounds of appeal filed on 12.05.2025. 5. The facts, in brief, as borne out from the order of the AO and Ld. CIT(A), are that there was search & seizure operation u/s 132 on the assessee 08.09.2021 and the cases for all the three years were reopened u/s 148.In response to the said notice u/s 148, the return was filed at the same income as per the original return. The assessee is engaged in the business of Rolling Mill and the modus operandi of the manufacturing activities is that the purchases are mode of iron scrap of different qualities and sizes and the steel ingots are the finished product. 6. The Ld. Counsel started his argument as per the grounds of appeal filed on 12.05.2025.The first ground of appeal relates to the approval as granted by the Ld. Addl. CIT u/s 148B, which was stated to be illegal and unsustainable as single approval order dated 30.03.2023 was granted for all the three years i.e. AY 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1) It is respectfully submitted that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax under section 148B (or 153D, as applicable) is vitiated in law as it was accorded in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. The scheme of the Act mandates the Additional CIT to discharge a quasi-judicial function by independently evaluating the issues raised in the draft assessment order, examining the material relied upon by the Assessing Officer, and considering the explanations and documents submitted by the assessee in response. The Additional CIT is not bound by the conclusions drawn in the investigation wing's appraisal report or the draft order, and is required to apply his own mind to determine the sustainability of proposed additions. The fact that approvals for multiple assessment years were granted on the very same day on which the draft orders were received clearly indicates a perfunctory process, defeating the legislative intent behind the statutory safeguard of prior approval. Such mechanical approval renders the consequential assessment order bad in law and unsustainable. 2) It is respectfully submitted that the approval granted by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....HRADUN j) 2024 (12) TMI 1553 - ITAT MUMBAI NILESH SHAMJI BHARANI VERSUS DCIT, CC-4 (1), MUMBAI k) SP SINGLA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY VS. CIT, ITA No. 140 to 145/Chd/2024, AY 2013-14 to 2018-19 l) Ganesh Builders vs. DCIT, ITA No. 422/CHD/2022 AY 2012-13 & 452/CHD/2022 AY 2012-13 (Relevant discussion in this case have been given starting from para 16, page 37 and by relying upon various judgments final finding has been given in para 16.19. page 48 & 49 of the order) 10. It was further argued that the judgment of Hon'ble Orrisa High Court in the case of Serajuddin vs. CIT as cited above has been approved by the Hon'ble Apex Court, where in the SLP of the department have been dismissed as per the decision reported in [2024] 163 taxmann.com 118. Our attention was also drawn to the judgment of the 'Orissa High Court' about the "CBDT Manual of Office Procedure in Feb, 2003" in exercise the power u/s 109 of the Act and para 9 of the Chapter-III of Volume-II (Tech.) of the said Manual. It was also submitted before us that the said judgment of the Orissa High Court in para 13,, wherein, the guidelines for granting approval have been issued by the CBDT for granting ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for that, it was argued by the counsel as under: "Mechanical Approval: The approval granted under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act by the Principal CIT (Central) is mechanical and devoid of any application of mind. The approval order dated 22.03.2022 merely states, "I am satisfied that it is a fit case for grant of approval," without mentioning the quantum or nature of the alleged income escaping assessment. The annexure enclosed with the sanction is limited solely to a credit entry-specifically, a Cenvat credit of Rs. 29,99,030-and makes no reference to the alleged unaccounted production or undisclosed sales, which purportedly form the primary basis in the reasons recorded for reopening. Thus there is a variation in reasons recorded and approval. The significant component relating to undisclosed sales and alleged unaccounted production finds no mention in the approval, evidencing that the authority failed to examine the key issue at all. Cenvat Credit Never Claimed as an expense in profit & loss account: The credit of Rs. 29,99,030 was never claimed by the assessee in the profit and loss account and, therefore, could not have resulted in any escapement of income....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4] 162 taxmann.com 903 (Bombay)[22-04-2024] d) S. V. JADHAV vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS. HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY Source (2024) 8 NYPCTR 562 (Bom) e) Mohd. Shafiq Cement Store vs. Income-tax Officer [2024] 168 taxmann.com 72 (Amritsar - Trib.)/[2025] 210 ITD 1 (Amritsar - Trib.)[18- 10-2024] f) Floyd Filandro Linhares vs. Income-tax Officer [2024] 166 taxmann.com 125 (Bombay)/[2025] 473 ITR 587 (Bombay)[07-08-2024] g) SBC Minerals (P.) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2024] 167 taxmann.com 113 (Delhi)[20-08-2024] h) CENTRAL INDIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. 333 ITR 237, i) WSFX Global Pay Ltd Vs ACIT Bombay High Court (2023) 7 NYPCTR 1771 (Bom) 13. It was, thus, stressed upon by the Counsel that the approval has been granted u/s 151 by the Ld. PCIT in a mechanical manner, and particularly, referred to the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Vodafone India Limited reported in 161 taxman 609in which, the notice u/s 148 was quashed for the reason, in as much as, in the notice stating escaping of income was mentioned as 42858.47 crore, whereas, in the order u/s 148A(d), it w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Income Tax Act, as it then stood, provided for automatic initiation of assessment proceedings under Section 153A for six assessment years preceding the year of search. Similarly, reopening of assessments under Section 153C was also automatic in respect of "other persons" based on seized material. However, the legal position has now been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Principal CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., reported in 150 Taxmann.com 257, wherein it was categorically held that:- "In respect of completed or non-pending assessment years as on the date of search, no addition can be made under Section 153A in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search relatable to the assessee and the assessment year in question." 2) Where an assessment has been completed under section 143(1) or 143(3), and no incriminating material was found during the search pertaining to the searched person for the relevant assessment year, and the time period for issuance of notice under section 143(2) has expired, any addition made in such completed assessments is beyond jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. 3) S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a deeming fiction wherein the conduct of a search is treated as "information" suggesting escapement of income. However, this deeming fiction has been inserted by way of an Explanation 2 and not through a Proviso. It is a settled principle of statutory interpretation that while a Proviso operates as an exception or condition altering the main provision, an Explanation only clarifies and cannot override or expand the primary statutory requirement. Therefore, the Explanation deeming a search as information must be read in conjunction with the main provision and the first proviso, which mandates that the information must relate to the specific assessment year in question. In the assessee's case, no incriminating material pertaining to the relevant assessment year was found during the course of search. Hence, the reliance solely on Explanation 2, without demonstrating that the information pertains to escapement of income for the relevant year, is misplaced and renders the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 legally unsustainable. The relevant first proviso to section 148 and explanation 2 to section 148 is reproduced as under:- 1st Proviso to section 148 as amended by F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... records, documents, and any assets in writing, and formed a reasoned belief that such material is relevant to the year for which notice is being proposed. Therefore, despite the deeming fiction applicable to searched persons, the issuance of notice under Section 148 still requires the Assessing Officer to demonstrate that the information unearthed during search leads to escapement of income in the specific assessment year. The mere fact of search, in itself, is not sufficient reason to issue a notice. Failure to establish this connection would render the issuance of notice without proper approval under Section 151 as bad in law and unsustainable. f) The interpretation outlined above is further supported by the legislative change brought about by the Finance Act, 2021, wherein the phrase "reasons to believe" - which previously formed the jurisdictional foundation for reopening under Section 147 - has been consciously omitted. The substituted scheme clearly reflects a shift in legislative intent, whereby the jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings now arises only when there is income that has actually escaped assessment, as evidenced by information as defined unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hi Ramdas Pai reported in 470 ITR 536, wherein it has been categorically held that a conjoint reading of Sections 147 and 148 makes it unequivocally clear that escapement of income is a sine qua non for the initiation of proceedings under Section 147. The Court emphasized that the availability of information suggesting escapement of income is a mandatory precondition for issuance of notice under Section 148. The phraseology employed in Section 148 post-amendment mandates that such information must be objective in nature, and not merely speculative or inferential. It must specifically indicate that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The Hon'ble Court further clarified that merely invoking the deeming fiction under Explanation 3 to Section 148, without any supporting material to correlate the alleged escapement to the relevant assessment year, would be inadequate. Explanation 2 is merely a facilitative provision, and the Assessing Officer is still required to independently evaluate whether the information gathered during the course of the search is sufficient to establish escapement of income warranting reassessment. Para F Ramdas Pai reported in 470 ITR 536 (R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income of Rs. 298,96,71,235/- as Long Term Capital Gain from sale of shares.' In the similar notice issued to another petitioner, everything is verbatim except the amounts involved. The first sentence in the said paragraph that the Assessee has not disclosed the transactions in question for the Assessment Year 2018-19, is falsified by the second sentence which states that the Assessee has claimed exempt income as long term capital gain from the sale of shares, which manifests the contradiction. Nothing more is necessary to specify as the matter is as apparent as can be. Therefore, this is a clear case of issuing notices based on disclosure in the existing Return of Income filed by the Assessee but on incorrect premise of nondisclosure. There was no new information whatsoever that has come into his domain suggestive of escapement of income. (c) It is pertinent to mention that the definition of information given under Explanation I to Section 148 is a 'means definition' as distinguished from 'means and includes definition'. This Explanation enumerates only two [upto 31.3.2022] and five [from 1.4.2022] categories and the information even if it be true, unless is the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct already on record as "information" may vest it with the power to issue a notice of re- assessment under Section 148A(b) but would certainly not vest it with the power to issue a re-assessment notice under Section 148 post an order under Section 148A(d). i) Similarly, in the case of Angelantoni Test Technologies SRL reported in 463 ITR 139 (Refer page no. 166 to 170 of case law index book), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court reiterated that under the amended reassessment regime, the existence of "information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment" remains the sine qua non for invoking jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act. The Court emphasized that the threshold requirement of escapement of income has not been diluted by the amendment, and that such information must be objective, specific, and relevant to the assessee and the assessment year in question. The following observation of the Court is noteworthy: 9. Further, this Court in Divya Capital One Private Limited (Earlier Known as Divya Portfolio Private Limited) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7(1) Delhi & Anr., 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1461 held that 'Whether it is "inf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s there has to be some material on record for such reopening u/s 148. It was further argued by the Ld. Counsel by drawing our attention to proviso to the Section 148 which read as under: "Provided that no notice under this section shall be issued unless there is information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year and the Assessing Officer has obtained prior approval of the specified authority to issue such notice." 16. Further, it was stressed before us by the Ld. Counsel that for each of the assessment year, the escapement has to be proved, because in the proviso, the word is "Relevant Assessment Year" and, further, by referring to Section 147, it was argued before us that in place of the word "Reason to Believe", it has been brought by way of Finance Act, 2021, "that there is an escaped income for the relevant assessment" year and, thus, there cannot be any automatic reopening of the three assessment years immediately preceding the AY relevant to previous year, in which, the search has been initiated there being any material and thus, in nutshell, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents, particularly of Hon'ble Punjab &Haryana High Court in the case of Om Overseas reported in 315 ITR 185 for the said preposition. It was further argued that even the CIT(A) has discussed this issue and given a finding at page 72 to 73 of his order and applied a gross profit rate of 4% on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 1,92,51,910/-for which, it was argued that the same was not in order as the rates of the purchases from the doubtful parties were same or less than the parties, whose purchases have not been doubted by the Department. Thus, there was no justification for making the addition of Rs. 7,70,048/- as sustained by the CIT(A). 19. With regard to the part addition of Rs. 1,13,70,000/- as sustained by the CIT(A) by taking an average power consumption for the last five years at 737.50 units metric tonnes and during the year under consideration, the per metric power consumption was 755 and, thus, the CIT(A) calculated the excess production and by adopting rate of sale and assuming that the sales have been made, calculated the addition of Rs. 1,13,70,000/- and against which, the department is in cross appeal. It was argued by the Ld. Counsel before us that there is no i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Even high quality and low quality of aluminium scrap is mixed with the scrap in the plant in order to get the final product as per the requirement of the buyer and as per order. The said combination also requires different power consumption. 24. It is also a matter of fact that, when ever there is power failure, a time of around 1-2 hours is again required for the furnace to again reach the same level. So naturally the power consumption would be more in such a case. 25. The seized annexure-6 (page-214-244 of PB), which is actually the power consumption reading of the furnace for every heat for a particular period also proves the vast variations in the consumption of electricity. For example- power consumption is 575 units also for a particular heat on 03.09.2021 (page-232 of PB) and it is 848 units also for a particular heat on 30.08.2021 (page-223 of PB). 26. The Copy of monthwise details of Power consumption for the years FY 2015-16 to FY 21-22 is also enclosed in the PB at pages-254-260. In the said consumption details also there is huge variation. Further the fact that the unit of the Assessee being an excisable unit also puts weight on the stand of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d circumstances. The Tribunal further observed that no experiments have been conducted in the factories of the appellants for devising the consumption norms of electricity norms of electricity for producing one MT of steel ingots. Tribunal also observed that the electricity consumption varies from one units to another and from one date to another and even from one heat to another within the same date. Therefore, no universal and uniformly acceptable standard of electricity consumption can be adopted for determining the excise duty liability that too on the basis of imaginary production assumed by the ' Revenue with no other supporting record, evidence or document to justify its allegations. The Tribunal has also considered the report of Dr. Batra, which has been relied upon for making the allegations that there was higher electricity consumption. It appears that Dr. Batra in his report has observed that for the production of 1 MT of steel ingots, 1046 units electricity required." b) Vishal Paper Industries vs JCIT in ITA No. 348/Chandi/2011 order dated 23.03.2012 "15. In the present case, the ld. CIT(A) presumed that consumption of higher electricity would dir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quality of labour/supervisory staff, diligence of management etc and thus, it was held that the action of the AO estimating the production of assessee on the basis of alleged excessive consumption of electricity is erroneous and fallacious. We also further note that ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the order in the case of Eastern Enterprises vs ACIT (supra), as relied by the ld AR before the ld CIT(A) as well as before us, the Co- ordinate Bench held that consumption of electricity may rise due to hundreds of factors or reasons, therefore, addition based on only such allegation was not found to be sustainable." e) ACIT vs M/s Nilesh Steel & Alloys Pvt Ltd. (ITAT Pune) in ITA No. 1636 & 1637 and 1589 & 1590 of 2012 order dated 30.11.2015 "Addition for alleged suppression of production based on mere variation in electricity consumption not sustainable" f) M/s Bhoday Steel Rolling Mills vs ITO in ITA No. 248/Chd/2019 order dated 05.07.2021 22. It was thus, argued before us that, since the consumption of electricity depends upon number of factors such as, quality of labor, supervisory staff, diligence of the management and, thus, no case could be made out of the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, the addition of bogus purchases as made by the AO was fully justified. Accordingly, the addition as sustained by the Ld. CIT(A), to the tune of Rs. 7,70,048/- by applying GP rate of 4% on the bogus purchases of Rs. 1,92,51,910/- was not justified. 24. In rejoinder, the Ld. Counsel argued that no evidence of the purchases and sales or any other raw material or other inputs have been found and, therefore, the calculation of unaccounted production based on the average consumption of unit or on the basis of average consumption of unit in AY 2021-22 was not justified at all and the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the part addition of unaccounted production and alleged unaccounted sales was wholly unjustified as there was no incriminating material found during course of search. The partial addition sustained on the basis of average electricity unit consumption was baseless in light of the binding judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the jurisdictional bench of the Chandigarh ITAT, and the guidelines issued by the PCIT, Patiala, regarding electricity consumption-reproduced in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Moreover, the affidavits of the chemist, as reproduced on page 24 of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion as made by the AO was of bogus purchases made from Neelkanth Steel and Allied Industries amounting to Rs. 1,92,51,910/- on the basis of wrong Canvet Credit availed by the assessee. Though the assessee furnished copies of the invoices of the said party along with the proof of movement of the goods, payment through banking channel, day to day stock and consumption register but the AO was not satisfied and he made the entire addition. The CIT(A) discussed this issue at length on the basis of the detailed submissions made by the assessee and came to the conclusion that only profit embedded in such purchases of Rs. 1,92,51,910/-from Neelkanth Steel and Allied Industries could be added and accordingly sustained an addition of Rs. 7,70,048/- by applying GP rate 4% on the purchases of Rs. 1,92,51,910/- from M/s Neelkanth Steel and Allied Industries, for which, both the parties are in cross appeal. 27. The assessee has also challenged the reopening of the case u/s 148 and the approval as granted by the Ld. PCIT u/s 151 and since, it goes to the very assumption of the jurisdiction by the AO, the same is being adjudicated first. 28. We have gone through the reasons as recorded by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r: • One of the jurisdictional issues which would arise for consideration is, whether there is 'information suggesting escapement of income' so as to invoke section 147 and issue notice under section 148. Should this jurisdictional fact be absent, the question of issuing notices or making orders under section 148A would not arise. It is pertinent to delve into the history of sections 147 and 148 as they stood both before the amendment. [Para B] • Under the old section, the opening words were 'If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year'. As against that, in the amended section, the opening words are: 'If any income chargeable to tax, in the case of an assessee, has escaped assessment for any assessment year'. So, what is conspicuously missing from the new section is the term 'reason to believe'. In other words, under the new provisions, section 147 can be invoked only if any income chargeable to tax has 'escaped assessment'. Thus, the Assessing Officer has to be prima facie satisfied that there is 'escapement of income', unlik....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ped assessment' would mean that there should be no need for any reason seems incorrect. The phraseology of amended section 148 makes in unmistakable terms clear that there should be a concrete information as defined in Explanation 1 to section 148. Such information should be suggestive of income escaping assessment and such information should be objective in nature. In other words, the arguable subjectivity in the pre- amendment provision is given a go-by. For conducting assessment under section 147, there should be not only escapement but also the reason to believe that there is such escapement, the reason being the information itself. Hence, a plausible view could be taken that post- amendment of the provision, the escapement has to be established with concrete information. Section 148A would only assist the Assessing Officer in coming to a conclusion whether such information is good enough to allow a notice to be issued under section 148. This is how, the new provisions should be interpreted so as to make them workable in accord with the intent to achieve the purpose for which statutory change was brought about. An argument to the contrary would hijack the statutory object. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been placed in the common paper book pages 1 to 6 and approval as granted by the PCIT as reproduced above, in as much as, in the approval along with the Annexure as accorded by the PCIT, there is only approval granted is on account of the information suggesting that the assessee had entered into bogus purchase transaction as per Annexure to the approval as reproduced above and further, the approval granted by the PCIT have been accorded on the ground that, if the search is initiated on or before 01.04.2021 as mentioned in clause (a) to Section 148A, then automatically, the case would be reopened u/s 148 is not a correct view taken by the PCIT. Further, the PCIT never accorded the approval on account of the unaccounted production based on the consumption of electricity units or on account of the stocks as found during the course of search. We have also gone through the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Tele performance Global Service (P.) Ltd. [2025] 170 taxmann.com 832 (SC) [10-01-2025] wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the approval has been granted without any application of mind and there is a variance in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ning is automatic as per proviso (a) to Section 148A is misplaced. There is also a variance in the approval granted by the PCIT and the reasons as recorded by the AO as described above, and, thus, we have no hesitation in holding that the issuance of notice u/s 148 without their being any finding about the escapement of income is bad in law in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Vasanthi Ramdas and of the Delhi High Court in the case of Divya Capital One Pvt. Ltd. following the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Teleperformance Global about the variance in the reasons as recorded by the AO and approval granted by the PCIT, the issuance of notice u/s 148 is quashed and, thus, the assessment as framed by the AO vide order dated 31.03.2023 deserves to be quashed as well. 36. Regarding the ground of approval as granted by the Worthy Addl. CIT, detailed arguments have been given by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee. Though the second show-cause notice, for which, the reply was to be submitted by 29.03.2023, all the three cases of the assessee were forwarded to the Addl. CIT vide single letter number 895 dated 29.03.2023 and on the next ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a mechanical manner without any application of mind. Thus, consequently the assessment order as passed by the AO on such approval deserves to be set-aside as the order has not been passed according to the mandate statue and laid down jurisprudence. 38. The next ground of appeal is on merits is of sustaining the part addition as sustained by the CIT(A) by applying average power consumption of 737.50 units per metric tons on the basis of five year average consumption unit by the assessee. He calculated the production in metric tons and applying a sale rate, the addition of Rs. 1,13,70,000/- has been sustained and both the sides are in cross appeal against the part addition sustained by the CIT(A). The department is in appeal against the addition deleted by the CIT(A). The facts are not disputed in as much as no evidence of unaccounted purchase or sales or production have been found during the course of search and it is also a fact that during the course of search, one annexure-6 was seized wherein, day and night heat had been recorded for the period starting for few days for the Financial Year 2021-22 and this consumption of units is as per the books of accounts. There is a variat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Further, we find that the sales have not been doubted by the AO. Only on the basis of the wrong Canvet Credit as per the information received, the addition have been made by the AO. We have carefully gone through the evidences and arguments placed on the record before the Authorities below and also before us, various judgments on the basis of the bogus purchases as relied upon by the Ld. Counsel including of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tejua Rohit Kumar reported in 94 taxmann.com 325 (SC) and judgment in the case of Century Plyboard Pvt. Ltd. reported in 103 taxmann.com 179 (SC) and also the judgment in the case of Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. reported in 110 taxmann.com 64 (SC) and many other judgment of the Chandigarh Bench of ITAT alongwith that of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Supertech Forgings India Pvt. Ltd. In ITA 101-2022 (O&M) (P&H), wherein, on identical facts & circumstances, the addition on account of the bogus purchases have been deleted. We also hold that the gross profit rate of 4% as applied by the CIT(A) on the bogus purchases of Rs. 1,92,51,910/- is not justified, since the purchases from Neelkanth Steel & Allied Industries have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he six years instead of monthly average calculated by the A.O. on the basis of seized material and made addition u/s 69A of the Act accordingly? 3. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 13,32,90,000/- by applying the average of annual power consumption for the six years and by failing to obtain the reasons for substantial increase in the turnover and decrease in average annual power consumption after the period of search i.e. for AY 2021-22 & AY 2022-23? 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before of at the time of hearing of the appeal. Grounds of appeal of the assessee in Cross Objection for AY 2019-20 1. That the re-opening of the case u/s 147 and completion of assessment by the Assessing Officer is void abinitio, since no satisfaction appears to have been recorded by the AO and as such approval as may have been granted by the Higher Authority is non-est and as such the assessment as framed by the AO deserves to be quashed. 2. That though the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have been recorded by the AO and as such approval as may have been granted by the Higher Authority is non-est and as such the assessment as framed by the AO deserves to be quashed. 2. That though the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition, but never the less, the addition was not liable to be made as no incriminating evidence had been found during search and, thus, the very basis of making the addition is void abintio. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to considered the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt Ltd as reported in 150 Taxmann. com 257. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 42. There are amended/additional grounds of appeal which for reference is reproduced below: Additional Grounds of the assessee in Cross objection filed for AY 2019- 20 1. On the facts and in law, the approval granted by the ld. Addl. CIT under Section 1488 is illegal and unsustainable, as a single approval order dated 30.03.2023 was issued for all three assessment years-AYS 2018-19 to 2020- 21 vide letter no.2384. 2. Tha....