2026 (4) TMI 561

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order of CIT(A) is bad in law & therefore liable to be quashed. 2. In the facts & circumstance of the case and in law CIT(A) erred in dismissing appeal on the ground of non-prosecution of appeal on the part of the appellant. 3. In the facts & circumstance of the case and in law CIT(A) should have held that AO erred in rejecting Books of accounts applying the provisions of Sec. 145(3) of the Act and framing assessment u/s. 144 of the Act as appellant has not violated any condition of said sections. 4. In the facts & circumstance of the case and in law CIT(A) should have held that AO erred in treating the sales to (1) Jay Reshmi Diamond Pvt. Ltd. & ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the 1. T. Act. In the facts & circumstances of the case, appellant reserves his right to adc, alter, modify, edit and/or delete any of the grounds of appeal." 3. The assessee company is engaged in the business of trading of diamond. The assessee filed return of income for assessment year 2015-16 showing total income of Rs. 15,63,410/- on 28-09-2015. The statutory notices were issued and in response, the assessee made written submissions vide letter dated 17-08-2017. The assessee submitted the audited report in Form No. 3CA/3CD, balance sheet, profit and loss account and other relevant accounts, computation of income. During the course of assessment proceedings, notices u/s. 133(6) were issued to various parties from where th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....36% of 2,61,40,000/-)) is added to the total income of the assessee for the A.Y.2015-16. Purchase amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- from Jay Reshmi Diamond Pvt. Ltd., is deemed to be included in corresponding purchase to sale amount. Hence no separate addition of Rs. 4,50,000/- is required as per the observations of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer further made addition of Rs. 37,100/- on account of difference in account under the head custom duty and stamp duty. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The ld. Ld. A.R. submitted that the AO is not justified in adding Rs 2,61,40,000/- as bogus/non-genuine purchases as having accepte....