TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and circumstances the entire purchase amount cannot be added as income from undisclosed sources. However, in such cases, at the most, the gross profit element on such purchases could be added, as contended by the ld. counsel. Accordingly, we direct the AO to apply the gross profit of 21.29% for the purchase aggregating to ₹ 52,36,013/-. After verifying the contention of the assessee that, actual purchase transaction from Gausiya Sea Foods was only ₹ 16,82,212/-. Thus, the addition would be restricted on gross profit on such purchases. - Decided partly in favour of assessee - ITA No. : 2263/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 19-10-2015 - SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,85,258/- (ii) Om Sai Fisheries ₹ 35,33,801/- ₹ 62,39,059/- the notices returned unserved on the addresses furnished by the assessee. When confronted with this information, the assessee informed the AO that, these parties might have left from the address available with the assessee. Since the assessee could not provide new address, AO held that, genuineness of the transactions carried out with these two parties are not genuine transaction and accordingly, he added the entire sum of purchases shown by the assessee from these two parties totaling to ₹ 62,39,059/-. 3. Before the CIT(A), the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had submitted a purchase voucher and confirmation from the party and also the evidence showing that the payments were made through cheques and bank statement of the assessee was also submitted. Thus, the genuineness of the transaction from both the parties cannot be doubted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO and held that payment by cheque itself does not prove that the purchase transaction is genuine. The onus was upon the assessee to provide correct addresses, therefore, in absence of any corroborative independent evidence, the addition has rightly been made by the AO. 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel Shri Prakash Jotwani, first drew our attention to the bills raised by these parties, as appearing in the paper-bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be said to be a genuine, especially in wake of enquiry by the AO u/s 133(6). 6. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the relevant finding given in the impugned order and material placed before us. The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in Fisheries Products which included export and local sales. The addition has been made by the AO on account of purchases made from two parties namely, Gausiya Sea Foods and Om Sai Fisheries. Out of the said purchases made, it has been pointed out that, so far as the amount of purchase mentioned in the case of Gausiya Sea Foods, the actual purchase amount is ₹ 16,82,212/- and not ₹ 26,85,258/-. The said addition has been made solely on the ground that notice u/s 133( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been taken to reject the books of accounts and apply some GP rate on such purchases. Here in this case, such an exercise has not been done. The assessee s gross profit during the year was at 22.29% which is quite comparable with the gross profit of the earlier years which was around 23.15% to 23.5%, looking to the fact that the assessee s sales turnover this year is almost double. Even though the assessee could not provide new addresses of the suppliers for the reason that they have shifted to some other place, it was incumbent upon the AO to analyse other corroborative evidence to see whether the purchases as such are genuine or not or have been made outside the books of account or at the most he can work out the profit element on su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
