Shagun Kumar Jain Enterprises, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward-47(5), New Delhi

ITA 5193/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6715 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 10-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 2(A); 147; 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO.-5193/DEL/2017. SHAGUN KUMAR JAIN ENTERPRISES. PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: G: NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 5193/DEL/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) SHAGUN KUMAR JAIN ENTERPRISES, NEW DELHI. VS. ITO, WARD 47(5), NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO: AABFS6011Q ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SATISH BANSAL, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI PRAKASH DUBEY, SR. DR PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM (A) THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-16, NEW DELHI 01/06/2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. GROUNDS TAKEN IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS WRONGLY HELD THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING U/S 147 IS VALID. 1(B) THAT THE LD. CIT (A)-16, NEW DELHI HAS WRONGLY HELD IT AS A TYPOGRAPHICAL HUMAN ERROR FOR MENTIONING THE DATE AS 25/3/2004 ON NOTICE ISSUED U/S 147, FOR WHICH REASONS WERE RECORDED ON A SUBSEQUENT DATE I.E. 26/3/2014, FOR FORMING AN OPINION WHICH WAS NOT AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. 1(C)THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS WRONGLY CONFIRMED THE LD. A.O.'S ACTION WHO HAD FAILED TO DISPOSED OFF THE OBJECTIONS FOR REOPENING U/S 148 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IMMEDIATELY ON RECEIPT OF OBJECTIONS RECORDED AT THE END OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ITA NO.-5193/DEL/2017. SHAGUN KUMAR JAIN ENTERPRISES. PAGE 2 OF 4 1(D) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY HELD THAT OBJECTIONS TO REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE FILED AFTER THE ASSESSMENT HAD BEEN COMPLETED. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. A.O. FOR TREATING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 5837560/- AS BOGUS PURCHASE ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING, WHICH IS PURELY BASED ON THE PRESUMPTION AND INCORRECT FACTS OF APPELLANT. 2(A) THAT THE LD. CIT(A)-16 NEW DELHI HAS WRONGLY IGNORED THE ASSESSEE'S ARGUMENT OF SALE OF SUCH ITEMS AT RS. 6538529/- WITH QUANTITATIVE DETAILS AGAINST THE SO CALLED BOGUS PURCHASES MADE AT RS. 5837558/-, WITH QUANTITATIVE DETAILS AND SHOWN PROFIT OF RS. 700971/- IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. 3. THAT THE ORDER IS BAD IN LAW AND ON FACTS (B) AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (LD. AR, FOR SHORT) FOR THE ASSESSEE INFORMED US THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OPTED TO SETTLE THE AFOREMENTIONED APPEAL UNDER VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020 (VSVS, FOR SHORT) AND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY FILED THE RELEVANT FORMS. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO LETTER DATED 9 TH APRIL, 2021 FILED FROM ASSESSEES SIDE IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT) GIVING INTIMATION OF THE SAME. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE LEARNED AR AS WELL AS THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE [LD. SR. DR, FOR SHORT] SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THIS APPEAL MAY BE TREATED AS WITHDRAWN AND MAY BE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF THE AFORESAID VSVS. AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS APPEAL HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS ON ACCOUNT OF AFORESAID VSVS, AND THIS APPEAL MAY BE TREATED AS WITHDRAWN ON ACCOUNT OF THE AFORESAID VSVS. ACCORDINGLY, THIS APPEAL HAVING BECOME INFRUCTUOUS, IS TREATED AS WITHDRAWN AND IS HEREBY DISMISSED. (B.1) BEFORE WE PART, WE HEREBY CLARIFY, BY WAY OF ABUNDANT CAUTION, THAT IF FOR SOME REASON THE DISPUTES UNDER THIS APPEAL BEFORE US ARE NOT SETTLED UNDER THE ITA NO.-5193/DEL/2017. SHAGUN KUMAR JAIN ENTERPRISES. PAGE 3 OF 4 AFORESAID VSVS, THEN THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH ITAT FOR RESTORATION OF THIS APPEAL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (C) IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS ALREADY PRONOUNCED ORALLY ON 12 TH APRIL, 2021 IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES, AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. NOW THIS ORDER IN WRITING IS SIGNED TODAY ON 13/04/21 . SD/- SD/- (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 13/04/21 (POOJA) COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA NO.-5193/DEL/2017. SHAGUN KUMAR JAIN ENTERPRISES. PAGE 4 OF 4 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER