ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 6(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S JEEVANDEEP PRAKASHAN PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of Publication of educational books, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2020-11 declaring income of Rs. 1.60 crore. The return of income was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 14.03.2013 accepting the return income. Subsequently, case was reopened under section 147. The assessing officer reopened the case on the basis of information received from the DGIT (Inv.), Mumbai, Mum 2019-M/s Jeevandeep Prakashan Pvt. Ltd.

who in turn received information from the Sales Taxes Department Government of Maharashtra that certain dealers were engaged in providing the accommodation entry without actual delivery of goods. The assessee is one of the beneficiaries of such accommodation entry. On the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer made his opinion about the re-opening of the case. Notice under section 148 dated 30.09.2010 was served upon the assessee. Reasons of re-opening were provided to the assessee on 22.07.2015. The Assessing Officer after serving notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) proceeded for re-assessment. During the re- assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has shown purchases of Rs. 4,00,878/- from Adinath Trading Company, whose name was listed in the list of bogus entry provider. The Assessing Officer issued show-cause notice why the purchases shown from hawala traders should not be treated as bogus and to bring to tax. The assessee filed its reply dated 23.02.2016. The reply of assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer (the contents of reply are not recorded in the assessment order). The Assessing Officer on the basis of on the basis of various decisions of Higher Courts as mentioned in paragraph-9 of the assessment order, took his view that the assessee has shown purchases from the undisclosed supplier. The Assessing Officer disallowed the entire purchases of Rs. 4,00,878/- in assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 10.03.2016. 2 Mum 2019-M/s Jeevandeep Prakashan Pvt. Ltd.

On the other hand, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submits that during the period under reference, the assessee purchases Diary for distribution to its customer. The assessee is regularly purchasing the similar Diaries in earlier year’s i.e in Financial Year (FY) 2008-09 & 2010-11 and in subsequent F Y 2011-12. The Diaries were purchased for increasing the market share and business relationship with customers. The assessee produced the bills, sample Diary, Ledger Account with bank statement highlighting the payment made to the parties. The ld. AR of the assessee further submits that original assessment was completed under section 143(3) only on satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. The re- opening was based merely on the information of DGIT(Inv.), without arriving at own satisfaction, was merely a change of opinion. The Assessing Officer has not discussed the documentary evidences furnished by assessee. The assessing officer made additions on the basis of third party information, without reference to the assessee. The assessing officer made addition without making any independent inquiry. The ld. AR of the assessee prayed for dismissal of appeal.

We have considered the rival contention of both the parties and perused the order of lower authorities. We have noted that after re-opening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer proceeded for re-opening. The assessee field its reply to the show-cause notice issued by Assessing Officer, vide its reply dated 23.02.2016. We have noted that the Assessing Officer has 4 Mum 2019-M/s Jeevandeep Prakashan Pvt. Ltd.