MOHD ISMAIL I A SHAIKH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 26(3)(4), MUMBAI

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.02.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10.

The assessee has challenged the order of Ld. CIT(A) on jurisdictional issue as well as on merit.

At the time of hearing when the case was called up for hearing none attended on behalf the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment was filed and therefore the

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 01.10.2009 declaring an income of Rs.1,43,567/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 148 of the Act by issuing notice dated 18.03.2013 after AO received information from DGIT (Inv.) wing, Mumbai that assessee is beneficiary of hawala purchase entries from three parties aggregating to Rs.51,21,288/-. The notice issued under section 148 of the Act was not complied with by the assessee. Thereafter again notice under section 142(1) of the Act was by issued a couple of times which were duly served on the assessee with no compliance on the part of the assessee. Finally a show cause notice was to the assessee dated 04.02.2015 calling upon the assessee to furnish various evidences to prove the genuineness of the purchases from three parties. Even then the assessee did not respond to the said show cause notice. Finally, assessment was framed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act by adding entire bogus purchases to the income of the assessee.