Case Law Details
Notwithstanding, the fact that objections were not filed to the pre-assessment notice, the respondent i.e., Assessing Officer could not have come to a conclusion that the transactions were bogus on the ground that they were not reported by the end dealers and therefore, he had no alternative, but, to confirm the proposal set out in the pre-assessment notice.
Assessing Officer, could have only come to a conclusion that the subject transactions were bogus, based on substantive material, and not that because objections were not filed by the petitioner, the assertions made in the pre-assessment notice would have to be deemed to be correct.
Relevant Extract of the Judgment
4. I must indicate that though the learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that a pre-assessment notice was issued to the petitioner, qua, which objections were not filed – it is however, the contention of the learned counsel that no material was supplied with the pre-assessment notice and that in any event, the ITC could not have been reversed, solely, on the ground that the end dealers had not reported the transactions effected with the petitioner.
4.1. In support of this submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the following judgments rendered by this Court:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
