2025 (8) TMI 1090

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. The Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts of the case reopening the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of reopening is without jurisdiction and in not permissible either in law or on facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming addition of Rs. 2,97,45,0007- u/s. 68 of the Act. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of Section 68 have no application as the amounts subjected to addition represents the receipts towards the sales made during the course of business. 4. Both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts of the case in making addition by relying on th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed upon M/s. Shoryaraj Enterprises and also furnished the ledger account. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the explanation of the assessee on the basis that Shri Gohil in his statement recorded under Section 133(1) of the Act has accepted the fact he was not doing any real business and only dealt with accommodation entries. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was of the view that with respect to sales made by the assessee to M/s. Shoryaraj Enterprises, actual delivery of goods has not taken place and only a paper transaction took place, in which the assessee has reflected the sale transaction of Rs. 2,97,45,000/- as income of the asessee. Accordingly, the above amount was added as income of the assessee u/s.68 of the Act. 4. In appeal,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A). 6. With respect to Ground No. 1, in which the assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act, we observe that in the instant case, the assessment of the assessee was reopened on the basis of information received by the Assessing Officer from the Investigation Wing that the assessee had obtained accommodation entries from M/s. Shoryaraj Enterprises and on the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer formed a reasonable beliefe that income of the assessee had escaped assessment. Further, Shri Satyajitsinh R. Gohil, proprietor of M/s. Shoryaraj Enterprises, in his statement also accepted that he was not doing any retail business and only dealt in providing accommo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....However, the basic argument of the Counsel for the assessee was that once the amount which has been added as income of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act has already been reflected as "sales" and duly accounted for by the assessee in the books of accounts and such income has also been accepted by Assessing Officer, then the very same amount cannot be added again under Section 68 of the Act or else it shall amount to double taxation. Further, the Counsel for the assessee also submitted that the Assessing Officer has also not doubted the corresponding purchases against these sales and therefore, in the instant facts, no addition is called for again in terms of Section 68 of the Act. In addition, the Counsel for the assessee also raised ....