9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the issue are that the assessee filed return of income on 24.9.2009 declaring total income of Rs. 9,33,990/-. The return of the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 3.3.2011. The AO received information from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that during the year that the assessee obtained bogus bills from the entry providers/hawala traders. Therefore, on the basis of this information, the AO came to the conclusion that the assessee received accommodation purchases bills from the following four parties: S.No. Name of the entry provider Maharashtra VAT No. AY Amount of bills taken by the assessee 1 M/s Swastik Enterprises 27610669252V 2009-10 Rs.2,15,373 2 M/s Deep Enterprises 277505955164V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been incorporated in para 5 of the appellate orders dismissed the appeal of the assessee. During the course of appellate proceedings, the ld.CIT(A) called upon the assessee to produce comparative details of GP/NP for preceding two and subsequent two years which has been incorporated by the ld.CIT(A) at para 6.11 of the appellate orders which is as under : AYr Gross sale Gross Profit in amount GP in % Net profit NP ratio 200708 7205105 3342510 46.39 NA NA 2008-09 18175117 7735031 42.56 2401364 13.21 2009-10 16922696 5866010 34.66 647357 3.83 2010-11 20025407 9534451 47.61 1816148 9.07 2011-12 28289308 10116545 35.76 1468834 5.19 The ld. CIT(A) observed that suppressed NP/GP of Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... through banking channel and purchased material were consumed for manufacturing of pharmaceutical instruments and which were eventually sold. The act of the FAA in upholding the order of the AO was nothing but based on conjecture, surmises and presumptions which was not permissible in law. The ld. AR argued that the purchases made by the assessee which went into manufacturing process could not be treated as bogus only on the basis of fact that the purchases made from the parties were listed on the website of Sales Tax Department, GOM as hawala dealers. Moreover, the assessee was confronted with the statements which were used by the revenue to make the additions. The ld. AR in support of his contention relied on the decision of the jurisdicti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled a copy of ledger account, purchase bills, delivery challans, proof of payments through banking channels and stock tally which proved beyond doubt that the assessee has received materials which were consumed in manufacturing process of pharmaceuticals and the AO did not point out any defects or deficiency in the books of account except basing his conclusion qua bogus purchase on the basis of information received from the Sales Tax Department, GOM. In our opinion the assessee has discharged the onus cast upon it and now the burden shifts to the revenue to disprove the contentions of the assessee by carrying out further inquiries which was not done in the present case. Moreover, the assessee was not confronted with the statements recorded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee with the aforesaid four parties instead of making a general observation about the information received from the Sales Tax Department of the Government of Maharashtra. Quite clearly, the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(Appeals) have taken note of the fact that no sales could have been effected by the assessee without purchases. In the present case, assessee has explained that all its sales are by way of exports. The books of account maintained by the assessee show payment for effecting such purchases by account payee cheques and also the vouchers for sale and purchase of goods, etc. Notably, no independent enquiries have been conducted by the Assessing Officer. Under identical circumstances, our Co-ordinate Benches in the cases of De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
