Skip to main content

Bogus sales and purchases: Reliance on statement of supplier who confesses to providing accommodation entries without giving assessee right of cross-examination violates principles of natural justice and the addition has to be deleted in toto

Bogus sales and purchases: Reliance on statement of supplier who confesses to providing accommodation entries without giving assessee right of cross-examination violates principles of natural justice and the addition has to be deleted in toto

(i) The assessment was reopened on the basis of the statement of Shri Hiten L. Rawal, the proprietor of M/s Zalak Impex. In this statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, Shri Rawal confessed to have provided accommodation entries in the form of sales and purchases, to various parties. The assessee was stated to have obtained bills for non-existing parties, amounting to Rs. 4,09,12,718, during the year under consideration. It remains undisputed that the assessee was never provided any opportunity to cross examine Shri Hiten L. Rawal, though he specifically asked for such cross examination. On the other hand, the burden was sought to be shifted on the assessee by the A.O., by asking him to produce Shri Rawal, even though it was the A.O. who had relied on the statement of Shri Rawal, without either confronting this statement to the assessee, or providing opportunity to the assessee to cross examine Shri Rawal. Therefore, the reassessment order is as a result of violation of the natural principle of audi alteram partem. A statement recorded at the back of a party cannot be used against such party without confronting such statement to the party. Hence, on this score alone, the reassessment order is unsustainable in the eye of law and we hereby cancel the same. As a consequence, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is also cancelled in toto.

(ii) Further, even otherwise, before the A.O., the assessee had contended that the assessee being in an export promotion zone, the movement of its goods is controlled and customs approved; that the purchases being approved purchases, there was no question of their being bogus purchases. The assessee enclosed the custom approved invoices in respect of purchases from Zalak Impex. As per these invoices, the goods purchased had been verified and approved by the Customs Authority. This clearly shows that the goods had actually been purchased and received by the assessee. As such, these purchases could not have, by any stretch of imagination, been treated as bogus purchases. It is also noteworthy that the payments made by the assessee to Zalak Impex were through account payee cheques only. Neither of the Taxing Authorities, however, took these invoices into consideration and wrongly held the assessee's purchases from Zalak Impex to be bogus purchases. Nothing has been brought on record to show that these invoices were self made or fabricated. Moreover, the comparative chart of purchases made during the year and the selling price has not been refuted and this also goes to prove the theory of bogus bills and accommodation entries to be wrong. Therefore, the order under appeal is a result of complete misreading and non-reading of cogent documentary evidence brought on record by the assessee. For this reason also, along with the reason that the sales made by the assessee were never questioned, the addition is deleted in toto.

 FOR COPY OF JUDGEMENT CLICK HERE


--
M/s N.K. Goel & Bros.
WWW.TaxingNarad.COM
Chartered Accountants
CA Yashu Goel
9899263490

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CBDT Instruction No 5/2014 dated 10.07.2014

Dear Members,   The Hon'ble CBDT has issued Instruction No 5/2014 dated  10.07.2014 , by which the monetary limits for filing appeals to ITAT / HIGH COURT / SUPREME COURT have been revised.   The New limits are:                                  Tax effect Appeal before ITAT                                Rs.  4,00,000/- High Court                                               Rs. 10,00,000/- Supreme Court                                        Rs. 25,00,000/-   Copy of Instruction is attached for your information.

S. 143(3) assessment void if case picked up contrary to CBDT’s Scrutiny Guidelines

Crystal Phosphates Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) S. 143(3) assessment void if case picked up contrary to CBDT’s Scrutiny Guidelines  For AY 2006-07, the assessee filed a ROI declaring income of Rs. 3.97 crore. ·          The case was selected for scrutiny under clause 2(v)(b) of the Scrutiny Guidelines issued by the CBDT. ·          The said clause of the Scrutiny Guidelines provided that a case had to be selected for compulsory scrutiny if an addition/ disallowance of Rs. 5 lacs or more was pending in appeal before the CIT(A) and such identical issue also originated in the year under consideration. The assessee claimed that as this condition stipulated in the Scrutiny Guidelines was not satisfied, the AO had no jurisdiction to select the case for scrutiny . The AO & CIT(A) rejected the claim . On appeal by the assessee to the Tribunal, HELD allowing the appeal : The CBDT’s instructions ...

GST - Electronic invoicing (E Invoicing) made mandatory

E-invoice has been made mandatory for taxpayers having turnover exceeding 10 crores from 1st October, 2022: Notification 17/2022 Central Tax dtd 01/08/2022 It implies that any registered person whose aggregate turnover in any preceding financial year from FY 2017-18 onwards has exceeded Rs 10 Crore shall issue E-invoice w.e.f 1st October 2022 . -- CA Yashu Goel 9899263490 M/s N.K. Goel & Bros. Chartered Accountants www.TaxingNarad.COM