JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI
Facts
The assessee appealed against orders from the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2018-19. The primary issue stemmed from an addition for bogus purchases and non-genuine sundry creditors, especially for AY 2015-16, due to the assessee's repeated failure to produce supporting evidence during assessment and appellate proceedings. The CIT(A) upheld the addition and directed reassessment for other years, leading to reassessment proceedings for all the impugned assessment years, including related penalty proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity for proper representation. Consequently, it set aside the orders of both the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. AO for all assessment years. The case has been remanded back to the Ld. AO with a direction to provide the assessee another opportunity to be heard and to file necessary evidence before framing fresh assessment orders.
Key Issues
Whether the initiation of reassessment proceedings was valid; whether additions made under Section 68 of the IT Act for bogus purchases and non-genuine sundry creditors were justified; and whether the penalties levied under Section 270A and Section 271AAC(1) were appropriate given the circumstances.
Sections Cited
250, 41(1), 251(2), 148A, 148, 143(3), 131, 144, 68, 142(1), 270A, 271AAC(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण गुवाहाटी पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्ुअल कोटु] [Virtual Court] श्री मनमोहन दास, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 217, 218 & 219/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 I.T.A. Nos.: 220 & 222/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 I.T.A. Nos.: 221 & 223/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jayanta Khaund ACIT, CIR-1, Guwahati Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AKKPK7824L Appearances: Assessee represented by : Sweta Jain, FCA. Department represented by : Kausik Ray, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : March 10th, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : March 21st, 2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These appeals filed by the assessee are against separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred
We will take up ITA No. 217/GTY/2024 as the lead case. Brief facts of the case are that in AY 2015-16 the case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 26.12.2017 assessing total income at Rs. 2,48,08,760/- after making addition of Rs. 1,88,60,982/- on account of bogus purchases (liability shown as sundry creditors) claimed during the period from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015. The addition was made as the assessee failed to produce any evidence in support of the claim of purchases made and the existence of the sundry creditors could not be proved in spite of he having been provided several opportunities. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). During the course of the appeal, several opportunities were afforded to the assessee to prove the claim on the purchases made by the assessee during the year and consequential sundry creditors raised on account of the same. The assessee was also given an opportunity to produce the supporting bills & vouchers and payment details for the above and accordingly summons u/s 131 of the Act was issued by the DCIT, Circle-1, Guwahati on 31.01.2019 and the assessee was requested to produce the details/documents, subsequent payments along with supporting bank statements and books of account for the purchases made during FY 2014-15 from Shri Toko Kach, Neelam Tain, Gem Taje and M/s. Tagum Enterprises, the bills and vouchers of which were produced as additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee failed to produce the required details which were called for and could produce nothing in spite of several opportunities being afforded. The Ld.
Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata
