Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2025 (10) TMI 693

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he view of the Assessing Officer could have been substituted in exercise of powers under section 263 of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the view taken by the Assessing Officer was a plausible view and thus, the Commissioner has erred in invoking the powers under section 263 of the Act. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner could not have set aside the assessment order. 3. At the outset, it is to be noted that Shri Gunjan Kakkad, Advocate represented the assessee in the course of hearing held on 22.07.2025, who extensively argued for condonation of delay of 2121 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. He placed strong reliance on the affidavit filed by the assessee notarised on 16.07.2025. Since the present appeal is against the revisionary order passed u/s.263 after a significant delay of almost six years, details and the factual position of the proceedings concluded earlier in this regard were enquired into from the Bench from the ld. Counsel for the assesse. In the same process, submission of power of attorney to represent the case was also questioned for which ld. Counsel ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he order before the Tribunal because I was of the belief that since the genuineness of the purchase and sale was established, I was of the bona fide belief that I would again satisfy the Assessing Officer and thus, there would be no change. I was of the belief that the various judgments of Hon'ble Courts would come in aid to sustain the same addition that was made during the assessment proceedings. 4. I say that upon passing of the assessment order, the entire amount alleged to be bogus was added to the total income. I was advised to pursue an appeal against the assessment order. Accordingly, I pursued my remedy. The said assessment order has been upheld by the Tribunal and against such order. I have filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and the same is pending admission. The appeal before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was pursued after the Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous application. 5. I say that at the time of pursuing the appeal before the Hon'ble High Court, I was advised to file an appeal before the Tribunal and challenge the order passed under section 263 of the Act. The present appeal is thus, under the circumstances fil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rnished by the assessee had no signature of receiving and there were no delivery challans for the receipt of goods. He thus, completed the assessment by estimating gross profit by applying a percentage of 12.5% being possible profit out of the purchases or Rs. 63,70,738/- made through non genuine parties and thus, made an addition of Rs. 7,96,342/-. The assessment was thus, completed at total assessed income of Rs. 9,69,100/-. 4. This assessment was accepted by the assessee owing to the smallness of the amount as mentioned in para-2 of the affidavit extracted above. He did not challenge the assessment order before the ld. CIT(A). Later ld. PCIT-32, Mumbai invoked revisionary proceedings by issuing a show cause notice u/s.263 on 30.01.2019, whereby he drew his consideration that ld. Assessing Officer has accepted the bogus purchase bills from bogus hawala bill providers and made an addition only to the extent of 12.5% of these total bogus purchases whereas the addition ought to have been made of the entire amount of Rs. 63,70,738/- and thus, has resulted into an underassessment of an income of Rs. 55,74,396/- (Rs. 63,70,738 - Rs. 7,96,342). 4.1. Assessee made its representatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her reliance is placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Durga Parsad More 82 ITR 540 where it has been held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that apparent is not real. In this case enough material has been brought on record to show that the apparent is not real. Further reliance is placed upon the decision Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 802 (SC). After going through the ratio of decisions as referred above, facts of the case, element of human probability and surrounding circumstances, it is noted that the appellant has failed to prove creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction in respect of bogus, purchases. The onus was upon the appellant to explain the source and nature of purchase transactions with satisfactory explanation. However, the appellant has not furnished any explanation and did not furnish any supporting evidence. .......... 27. The appellant's case, with similar facts and situation as of Shoreline Hotels (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, also had very reliable and genuine information from Sales Tax Authorities wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of N.K. Industries Ltd. (supra) and that the laid order is non speaking and contrary to the law. It was also urged that the order be recalled as the case of the assessee is covered by the precedent said by Jurisdictional High Court. The Coordinate Bench dealt with the miscellaneous application and found that there is no rectifiable mistake in the said order which is apparent from record as required under the provisions of section 254(2). The said miscellaneous application filed by the assessee was thus, dismissed. 7.1. Against the order of the Coordinate Bench and after the disposal of the miscellaneous application, assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay, which is pending for admission, fact of which is averred by the assessee in para-4 of his affidavit extracted above. Assessee mentions that the appeal before Hon'ble High Court Bombay was pursued after the dismissal of miscellaneous application by the Tribunal. 8. From the chronology of the multiple proceedings detailed above, it is evident that assessee from all the forums could not establish the genuineness of the purchases which have been a....