Assesee is pvt limited co engaged in the manufacturing of steel billets. Search action U\/sec. 132 was conducted In the month of May 2021. Notice u\/Sec. 148 dated 28.03.2021 for A.Y. 2017-18 on the basis of information of Sales tax department about purchases one party. Assessee could not upload the return on due to problem at site , also have evidence for that, as complaint also made. So ultimately on 1.03.2022, assesee has submitted return manually to consider the original return filed u\/sec.139(1) as return in response to Notice u\/Sec. 148. Then asked the reasons and took objections. AO passed the speaking order rejecting objection and issued show cause Notice on 23.03.2022 asking as to show cause as to why purchases from few other parties should not be disallowed and ask to submit reply by 28.03.2022. Purchases from these parties are almost 80% of total purchases. Assessee has submitted reply and also stated that time may be given and made reference to JCIT u\/Sec. 144A explaining all facts and give direction for not using any material found in search as this year again will be covered in search proceedings and JCIT also gave the directions to AO on 30.03.2022 for not using search material in this assessment. However AO passed the assessment order disallowed purchases which are almost 80% of total purchases on following grounds<\/p>\n
1. Assessee co has not responded to 148 in time and therefore proceedure as laid down in decision of GKN drive shaft could not be followed.<\/p>\n
2. Summonce issued to parties were not responded and therefore these purchases are bogus ignoring the submissions given by the Assessee co<\/p>\n
3. Directions of JCIT u\/Sec. 144A have been complied as he has not made addition by using material found in search.<\/p>\n
whether AO action is justified ?<\/p>\n
when Notice u\/Sec. 148 reference is only for one party about bogus purchases?
\nwhen he has not rejected books and accepted total sales<\/p>\n
when few parties have responded to summonce which were issued at flag end of tine barring date<\/p>\n
pl guide.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","qa_expert":[515],"qa_category":[23],"qa_tag":[543,136,156],"class_list":["post-26122","qa","type-qa","status-publish","hentry","qa_expert-dr-k-shivaram-senior-advocate","qa_category-income-tax","qa_tag-bogus-purchases","qa_tag-reassessment","qa_tag-search"],"acf":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa\/26122","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/qa"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=26122"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26122"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"qa_expert","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa_expert?post=26122"},{"taxonomy":"qa_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa_category?post=26122"},{"taxonomy":"qa_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa_tag?post=26122"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}