2025 (4) TMI 2218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or were fulfilled by the Ed. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3) Kolkata for his specious action of invoking the mischief u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the alleged purchase conceived in the present context and the alleged addition upheld on that basis in the amount of Rs. 30.00.000/- is therefore ab initio void, ultra vires and ex-facie null in law 2. FOR THAT on a true and proper interpretation of the scope of the provisions of s. 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Kolkata-27 was absolutely in error in upholding the specious addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- resorted to by the Id. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3), Kolkata on ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al income at Rs. 22,40,040/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of Sponge Iron and trading coal and has shown mainly, income under the head profits & gains from business or profession and income from other sources. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices were duly issued and served on the assessee. In para 2.1 page 2 of the assessment order, the AO noted that a credible information was received, uploaded on the Insight Portal, regarding Majee Group being engaged in sales of illegal coal and that the assessee company i.e. M/s Sen Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. had purchased coal by making cash payments, amounting to Rs. 30,00,000/-, to Majee Group during the year ended on 31.03.202....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in cash to the said person. According to the assessee the assessment should have been framed u/s.153C r.w.s.143(3) of the Act as there was exclusive provisions provided in the Act to deal with the cases where some incriminating material found qua the assessee during the course of search on the third party and, therefore, the assessment framed by the AO u/s.143(3) of the Act is bad in law. In support of his contentions, ld. AR relied on the following decisions :- i) Shyam Sunder Khandelwal [2024] 161 taxmann.com 255(Rajasthan); ii) Sejal Jewellary [2025] 171 taxmann.com 846(Bombay); and iii) Sri Dinakara Suvarna, [2022] 143 taxmann.com 362 (Karnataka) 5. Ld. Counsel submitted that in all these above decisions i....