Case Number: ITA 1689/DEL/2020
Appellant: Ashok Kumar Jain, New Delhi
Respondent: ACIT Circle-52(1), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2012-13
Result: Appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes
Case Filed on: 2020-10-14
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2023-07-06
Pronounced on: 2023-07-06
This case involves Ashok Kumar Jain, proprietor of M/s A.L. Jewellers, challenging the addition made on account of bogus purchases for the assessment year 2012-13. The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi, which confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO).
The primary issue in this case was the addition of Rs. 1,68,263 made by the AO on account of bogus purchases from M/s. Centre Point Gems Pvt. Ltd. The AO disallowed the purchases, alleging that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the transactions.
The appellant, represented by Shri Anil Kumar Sujanti, CA, argued that the AO and CIT(A) did not consider the documentary evidence provided by the assessee to substantiate the purchases. The appellant contended that the authorities failed to provide a fair opportunity for the assessee to present his case and rebut the remand report.
The respondent, represented by Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR, supported the orders of the lower authorities, arguing that the assessee did not discharge the onus of proving the genuineness of the purchases.
The tribunal, comprising Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member, and Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member, noted the following:
The tribunal observed that the AO did not provide adequate opportunity for the assessee to explain and substantiate the purchases from M/s. Centre Point Gems Pvt. Ltd. The AO proceeded with the addition without issuing a proper show cause notice or making an order sheet entry asking for further details.
The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) failed to consider the additional evidence submitted by the assessee under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The CIT(A) did not make any comments on whether he admitted or dismissed the additional evidence, nor did he provide the assessee with an opportunity to respond to the remand report of the AO.
The tribunal held that the authorities below violated the principles of natural justice by not providing the assessee with a fair opportunity to present his case. The CIT(A) did not confront the remand report to the assessee for rebuttal and dismissed the appeal in a cryptic manner without properly appreciating the documentary evidence and submissions of the assessee.
The tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO is directed to provide due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the additional evidence before making a final decision. The tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.
The order was pronounced in the open court on 6th July 2023, ensuring that the principles of natural justice are upheld in the reassessment proceedings.
Order:
The appeal filed by Ashok Kumar Jain is partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter is restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Author: Judicial Member, Shri Chandra Mohan Garg
Accountant Member: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar
Date: 06.07.2023
ITA 1689/DEL/2020: Ashok Kumar Jain vs. ACIT Circle-52(1) – Dispute Over Bogus Purchases
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform