Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1408 - AT - Income TaxAddition being bogus purchase of diamonds from M/s. Vitrag Jewels - Held that:- From the pictorial chart the activities of persons/concerns in each Box is as stated and the numerical numbers are step by step activities in serial number of concerns in Box C Rajendra Jains concerns place first the order (1) with foreign Belgium concerns for diamonds. The Box B concerns, (2) takes the order and ships the diamond to Box C, then (3) the concern in Box C collects the diamond sent by Box B, then (4) the diamonds are sent to concerns like assessee in Box E and the (5) the concerns in Box E purchases the diamonds and the (6) issues the cheques/RTGS in the name of the concerns shown in the invoice of sale i.e. concerns named in Box C. Thereafter (7) step, the Box C concerns after receiving the cheque/RTGS from Box E concerns (assessee), deposit it in their bank account. Thereafter (8) step concern in Box C converts the amount deposited in their accounts into foreign exchange and transfer it to Box B. (9th) step, the Belgium concern in Box B gets the sale consideration of diamonds sold to Box C concern. When the aforesaid transaction is seen in the light of the statement of assessee that in the diamond business, the Angadias bring the diamond to their show room and the assessee selects some diamonds from them, which are invoiced in the name of concerns in Box C and the cheques/RTGS are deposited in their bank accounts (Box C) concerns means the assessee cannot be said to be doing business as suggested by concerns in Box C. From the aforesaid entire transaction the only inference in respect to the role of persons named in Box D can only be that of carriers of diamond to people like assessee. This inference from the aforesaid analysis can only be changed by bringing cogent evidence or at least by bringing on record the statements of the nine persons named in Box D to the effect that they corroborate the version given by Shri Rajendra Jain as correct. Thus we are of the considered opinion that the additions saddled on the assessee for AYs. 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2014-15 should be deleted and we order accordingly.
|