RAGHVAN V NAIR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 24(3)(4), MUMBAI

The authorities below have erred in law as well as on facts in making/ sustaining addition amounting to Rs 7,09,42,510 on account of "bogus purchases / low gross profit ratio"

The authorities below have erred in law in rejecting/ upholding rejection of the books of account u/s 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The authorities below have erred in law as well as on facts in rejecting the books of account u/s 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. 5. The authorities below have erred in making/ sustaining addition amounting to Rs.13,10,855/- u/s 14A of the Act.” 2. During the course of hearing, it was stated at the very outset by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that though Ground no.1 was raised before the Ld. CIT(A), but it has not been adjudicated by him, therefore, this issue needs to be sent back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of jurisdictional ground i.e. Ground No.1. 3. Per contra, Ld. DR fairly submitted that the aforesaid ground was raised by the assessee but it was not adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A). 4. We have gone through the orders passed by the lower authorities. It is noted that Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned that Ground No.1 was general in nature, hence, it was not adjudicated. Ld. Counsel has submitted that this ground goes to the root of the matter therefore its proper adjudication is mandatory before any discussion could be held on merits. We agree with the submissions made by Ld. Counsel and therefore, this appeal is sent back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) who shall adjudicate all the grounds afresh including ground No.1 after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall make requisite cooperation with the Ld.

3 Raghvan V. Nair CIT(A) by attending hearing and placing written submissions and evidences in his support and as may be directed as per law and facts. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee may be treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order was pronounced in the open court at the conclusion of hearing.