2026 (5) TMI 1857

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by the assessee are as under: "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT (A)-2, Chennai ["the CIT(A)" for short] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act for short] erred in affirming the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act passed by the Learned Assessing Officer, Income Tax Officer-25(2)(1), Mumbai ["the AO" for short] which is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) confirming the assessment order is bad in law since: a. The Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the additional grounds raised by the Appellant; b. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....isallowed by Ld. AO. 6. While doing so, the learned CIT(A), failed to appreciate that: (i) The purchases were genuine business transactions and duly recorded in the regular books of account; (ii) The entire consideration for such purchases was paid through account payee cheques/banking channels, duly reflected in the bank statements as also the audited books of account and the source of expenditure was fully explained and therefore section 69C of the Act is wrongly invoked by the Ld. AO; (iii) The corresponding sales arising from such purchases have been accepted by the Ld. AO without any adverse finding, and therefore, having accepted the sales, the purchases forming part thereof could not have been trea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iginal return as the return in response to notice u/s 148. The reason for reopening was given to the assessee. After hearing the assessee including notices u/s 133(6) of the Act, the AO added the entire bogus purchases of Rs.20,66,733/- u/s 69C of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, statement of fact and the order of AO and observed that the onus to prove the expenditure was on the assessee. He observed that contemporaneous proof of physical receipt/consumption of goods were not provided. The sales tax intelligence corroborates the bogus nature of the bills without delivery. Therefore, he upheld the addition made by the AO u/s 69C of the Act. ....