BASANT FUTERMAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 18(1)(2), MUMBAI

Shri Basant Futermal Jain 4. I have considered rival contentions. As per the reasons recorded for reopening, I am satisfied that AO has correctly reopened the assessment in so far as AO has reason to believe that there was escapement of income. During the course of reassessment, AO found that assessee has made bogus purchases. On such purchases, AO added 12.5%.

By the impugned order CIT(A) restricted the addition to 10.11%. From the record we found that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee furnished / produced following documents and made submission to substantiate genuineness of purchases made from Mls Lahree Impex. • Copies of purchases bills issued by M/s Lahree Impex • Copies of Ledger account • Bank statements duly authenticated by respective bank to substantiate that all payments have been made by proper banking channel by cheques drawn on banks • Copies of audit report and audited accounts duly audited by Auditor which shows that no discrepancy has been noticed on such audit and accounts are correct and complete. • The assessee produced books of accounts which have been properly maintained and no discrepancy has been noticed either by the Auditor or by the Assessing Officer. • Corresponding sales made have also been explained which have been accepted by the learned Assessing Officer as no fault has been found on such verification . • The assessee produced quantitative records which incorporate all the purchases and sales made by assessee. • The assessee furnished death certificate of Shri Indermal Kasturchandji who is karta of HUF - Prop of Mls Lahree Impex. The assessee shown his inability to produce said party as he expired. • The assessee submitted enough evidences which were in his possession which are mentioned hereinabove. By furnishing said evidences primary onus casted upon appellant has been discharged and now onus shift upon, the Assessing Officer to prove "either these documents are false or bring cogent material on record to prove otherwise. • The learned Assessing Officer ought to have appreciated that this is assessment under section 148 of the Act and it is his allegation that