TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing speaking order. 2. That the comment/remand report not taken from Revenue in view of the grounds raised in Appeal before CIT-A. 3. That Panchnama is invalid, bad in law, void, without jurisdiction, barred by limitation, and was not produced for signatures of Assessee by the Authorized officer. 4. Annexure J, Annexure-S and Annexure-O not provided to assessee at the time of search & seizure. 5. That Assessing officer fails to bring on record that the Search party can consider any person (even he holds no authorization in writing from assessee) as authorized representative of assessee. 6. The Panchnama is not correct as authorized officer is having the warrant of authorization dated 01.11.201 and search was conducted on 01.11.2018. 7. The Panchnama is not correct as authorized officer stated in the Panchnama that search party reach for search at 3.54 A.M and Search started at 3.55 A.M. 8. That Assessing officer fails to bring on record, under what circumstances search party leaked the information to Mr. Mukesh to arrived at the search place in late night i.e.at 3.54 A.M. on 01.11.2018. 9. That Assessing office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Thereafter, search u/s 132 of Act was conducted on 31.10.2018 to 17.12.2018 at the business premises of M/s Faqir Chand Lockers and Vaults Private Limited. During the course of search, it was found that there were 300 lockers in the name of different persons mostly belonging to nearby business entities. Among these lockers, one locker No. 183 was allotted in the name of Shri Ved Prakash Agarwal (assessee herein), accordingly a search warrant was issued in the name of the assessee on the premise Locker No 183 at M/s Faqir Chand lockers and Vaults Private Limited 6704A, Khari Baoli, Chandni Chowk, Delhi, in the name of Shri Vikash Jalan and the same was executed on 01.11.2018. Assessment jurisdiction over the assessee was transferred by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax. Delhi-15, New Delhi vide order u/s 127 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. A notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 28.09.2020 requiring the assesses to furnish the return of income for the year under consideration being one of the six assessment years preceding the assessment year in which search was conducted within 15 days of service of the said notice. In response to the notice, assessee e-filed return on 28.12.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the legal heir of the deceased and the new proprietor of M/s Om Bhandar. 8. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO observed that the assessee had made payments to certain parties towards purchase of goods and received amounts from parties on account of sale of goods. These parties were apparently dummy parties controlled by one Shri Hitesh. Jain, an admitted entry operator. Since the assessee had booked bogus purchases, vide notice dated 06-04-2021 issued u/s 142(1), the issue was confronted to the assessee. In response to the above, the assessee submitted his reply vide his submission dated 28.06.021 which is recorded by the AO in the assessment order. However, the above submissions of the assessee were considered by the AO and found not tenable. 9. Further AO observed that the assessee was not able to justify that the assessee has transacted with the bogus parties controlled by the abovesaid entry operator. The mere fact that payments have been made through account payee cheque cannot, in any way, paint a bogus transaction with colours of genuineness. AO relying on the decisions of Hon'ble courts observed that mere payment by account payee cheque cannot establish ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as under :- 1. The present appeal arises against the order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer, which has been confirmed/partly confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without properly appreciating the facts and legal position. The assessment order is illegal, arbitrary, and passed in violation of principles of natural justice and settled law. 2. That the comment/remand report not taken from Revenue in view of the grounds raised in Appeal before CIT-(A) 3. That Panchnama is invalid and defective, bad in law, void, without jurisdiction, barred by limitation, was not produced for signatures of Assessee by the Authorized officer. That Panchnama is invalid as the same is not produced for signatures by the assessee by the Authorized officer. Accordingly, the said Panchnama should not be read / given any weightage as said panchnama are nonest in the eye of law. Therefore the said order is nonest under the eyes of law. Hence on this ground alone the assessment order is wrong, baseless and liable to be quash/set-aside as the same is void-ab-initio. 4. Annexure J, Annexure-S and Annexure-O not provided to assessee at the time of search & seizure.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Hence on this ground alone the assessment order is wrong, baseless and liable to be quash/set-aside as the same is void-ab-initio. 9. That Assessing officer fails to bring on record, under what circumstances search party search the locker before sun arises. As search can be started only after sun arises and there is no meteorological department (Mausam Vibhag) report that on 01/11/2018 at 3.54 A.M. sun arises. Therefore the said assessment order is nonest under the eyes of law. Hence on this ground alone the assessment order is wrong, baseless and liable to be quash/set-aside as the same is void-ab-initio. 10. That assessee has prove the identity and creditworthiness of parties from whom purchase and sale made by assessee by submitting the VAT registration documents as VAT registration is granted by State Government under VAT ACT only after verifying the credentials of prospective Dealers in compliance of procedures prescribed under the VAT Act. Therefore the additions is not sustainable under the law and on this ground alone the assessment order is wrong, baseless and liable to be quash/set-aside as the same is void-ab-initio. No defect has been pointed o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls purchased, copies of bank statements to show that payment for such purchases were made through regular banking channels, etc., to establish the genuineness of the purchases. Therefore the said assessment order is nonest under the eyes of law. Hence on this ground alone the assessment order is arbitrary, wrong, baseless and liable to be quash/set-aside as the same is void-ab-initio. 16. That Assessing Officer fails to bring on record any material evidence to show that the purchases/sales were bogus. Mere reliance by the Assessing Officer on information obtained from the Dy. Director (Investigation) Panipat on CRIU, Insight portal of Department or the statements of persons made before the said authorities would not be sufficient to treat the Purchases/sales as bogus and thereafter to make addition. Therefore the said assessment order is nonest under the eyes of law. Hence on this ground alone the assessment order is wrong, baseless and liable to be quash/set-aside as the same is void-ab-initio. 17. That the sworn statement of parties before Dy. Director (Investigation) Panipat on CRIU, Insight portal of Department/authorities, without affording the assessee any o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... A.O. arbitrately and using the pick and choose policy took the GP of Assessment year 2019-20. In the year 2019-20 major trading was Pulses and there was negligible trading of Rice while in the AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 trading of rice was 24% to 40% which can be verified from the trading A/c of the respective year. It is pertaining to mentioned here that the transaction made in 2019-20 have no relation/linkage with the transaction of AY 2013-14 to 2016-17. Further the Ld. A.O not has brought on record the reasons for taking the GP of 2019-20 which itself shows that the Ld. A.O has not followed procedures as Ld. A.O. is duty bound to disclosed the same on the office records. In the view of the above stated facts and submission it is humbly requested to that the assessment order be set a sided as the same is arbitrary, wrong, baseless. (1) GPTakenforadditionofAY2019-20(due tohigherin6 years)3.69% instead of addition pertain to 2013-2014 :- A.Y. Bogus bills of purchase and sale GP as per books Benchmark G.P. Difference Undisclosed income worked out by AO 2013-14 20,82,19,683/- 0.81% 3.69% 2.88% 59,96,727 /- 2014-15 6,91,43,890/- 0.92....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... We observed that the assessee has made transactions with five parties, details of which are given above in the table, have not responded to the notices u/s 133(6) of the Act, therefore, the AO could not verify the genuineness of the purchases. We further observed that the assessee is engaged in trading business and sales were accepted against the purchases and without purchases, the assessee could not have achieved the sales. Further we observed that the AO has fully accepted the sales declared by the assessee. We further observed that all the transactions are discharged through banking channels. 19. Further we observed that the assessee has proved the identity and creditworthiness of parties from whom purchase and sales made by assessee by submitting the VAT registration documents as VAT registration is granted by State Government under VAT ACT only after verifying the credentials of prospective Dealers in compliance of procedures prescribed under the VAT Act. 20. We further observed that assessee has proved the identity and creditworthiness of parties from whom purchase and sale made by assessee by submitting the Bank Account details as in India, bank account can be opene....