News & Events
17/04/2026
GST Advisory: Interest Recalculation for Table 5.1 of GSTR-3B
16/04/2026
RBI Eases Branch Expansion Norms for NBFCs to Boost Ease of Doing Business
15/04/2026
RBI Engages Banks to Boost Deposit Growth Amid Shift in Household Savings
SEBI Seeks CBDT Clarity on Tax Liability of FPI Authorised Representatives
IT Dept Enables Offline Utility for Forms 145 & 146 on e-Filing Portal
14/04/2026
RBI Sends Back Ujjivan SFB’s Universal Bank Licence Application
ICAI Broadens Scope of Audit Quality Framework for More Firms
13/04/2026
CAG Flags Serious Deficiencies in GST E-Way Bill System in J&K
RBI Plans Delay & Safety Checks for High-Value UPI Transactions
India Tops List of Regressive Tax Suggestions by IMF: Oxfam Report
AI Adoption in Finance Must Be Backed by Safeguards: RBI Deputy Governor
Notification/Circulars
17/04/2026
Implementation of Section 51A of UAPA, 1967: Updates to UNSC’s 1988 (2011) Taliban Sanctions List: Amendment of 3 Entries
CBIC Appoints Common Adjudicating Authority under Customs Act (Notification 38/2026)
CBDT Issues Corrigendum to Income-tax Notification No. 64/2026
16/04/2026
CBIC Notification No. 37/2026-Customs (N.T.): Amendment to Customs Valuation Tables
Implementation of Section 51A of UAPA, 1967: Updates to UNSC’s 1988 (2011) Taliban Sanctions List: Amendment of 04 Entries
15/04/2026
Central Excise Amendment Notification – Revision to ₹31.5 per Litre Rate (Effective Immediately)
Centre Notifies Changes to Notification No. 08/2026-Central Excise
Government Amends Central Excise Notification Dated 26 March 2026
Government Increases Road & Infrastructure Cess on Diesel to ₹36 per Litre
Reserve Bank of India (Non-Banking Financial Companies – Branch Authorisation) Amendment Directions, 2026
CBIC Issues Procedure for Handling Returned Export Cargo Amid Strait of Hormuz Disruption
11/04/2026
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form 3
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form 1 and 4
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form 2
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form 5
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form 6
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form 7
Corrigendum to Notification of Income tax return Form U
Customs Issues SOP for SEZ Exports Due to Hormuz Closure
Govt Clarifies Rebate in Case of Lower Export Realisation
10/04/2026
Master Direction - Reserve Bank of India (Non-resident Investment in Debt Instruments) Directions, 2025 – amendment
Formation of new districts in the State of Andhra Pradesh – Assignment of Lead Bank Responsibility
Guidelines to facilitate faster cross-border inward payments
Article Details
Bogus sales and purchases: Reliance on statement of supplier who confesses to providing accommodation entries without giving assessee right of cross-examination violates principles of natural justice and the addition has to be deleted in toto

ACIT vs. Tristar Jewellery Exports Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: July 31, 2015 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: August 6, 2015 (Date of publication)
AY: 2006-07
FILE: Click here to download the file in pdf format
CITATION:  
Bogus sales and purchases: Reliance on statement of supplier who confesses to providing accommodation entries without giving assessee right of cross-examination violates principles of natural justice and the addition has to be deleted in toto

 

(i) The assessment was reopened on the basis of the statement of Shri Hiten L. Rawal, the proprietor of M/s Zalak Impex. In this statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, Shri Rawal confessed to have provided accommodation entries in the form of sales and purchases, to various parties. The assessee was stated to have obtained bills for non-existing parties, amounting to Rs. 4,09,12,718, during the year under consideration. It remains undisputed that the assessee was never provided any opportunity to cross examine Shri Hiten L. Rawal, though he specifically asked for such cross examination. On the other hand, the burden was sought to be shifted on the assessee by the A.O., by asking him to produce Shri Rawal, even though it was the A.O. who had relied on the statement of Shri Rawal, without either confronting this statement to the assessee, or providing opportunity to the assessee to cross examine Shri Rawal. Therefore, the reassessment order is as a result of violation of the natural principle of audi alteram partem. A statement recorded at the back of a party cannot be used against such party without confronting such statement to the party. Hence, on this score alone, the reassessment order is unsustainable in the eye of law and we hereby cancel the same. As a consequence, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is also cancelled in toto.

(ii) Further, even otherwise, before the A.O., the assessee had contended that the assessee being in an export promotion zone, the movement of its goods is controlled and customs approved; that the purchases being approved purchases, there was no question of their being bogus purchases. The assessee enclosed the custom approved invoices in respect of purchases from Zalak Impex. As per these invoices, the goods purchased had been verified and approved by the Customs Authority. This clearly shows that the goods had actually been purchased and received by the assessee. As such, these purchases could not have, by any stretch of imagination, been treated as bogus purchases. It is also noteworthy that the payments made by the assessee to Zalak Impex were through account payee cheques only. Neither of the Taxing Authorities, however, took these invoices into consideration and wrongly held the assessee’s purchases from Zalak Impex to be bogus purchases. Nothing has been brought on record to show that these invoices were self made or fabricated. Moreover, the comparative chart of purchases made during the year and the selling price has not been refuted and this also goes to prove the theory of bogus bills and accommodation entries to be wrong. Therefore, the order under appeal is a result of complete misreading and non-reading of cogent documentary evidence brought on record by the assessee. For this reason also, along with the reason that the sales made by the assessee were never questioned, the addition is deleted in toto.