9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of alleged bogus sales. 2. On the facts and in law, the learned CIT (A) 32 has erred in confirming adhoc disallowance of 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 23,13,873/- from the following parties: Sr.no. Name of Party Purchases Amount (in Rs.) 1. M/s. Ankit Enterprises 42,59,263/- 2. M/s. Maulik Steel Corporation 40,29,858/- 3. M/s. Vaishali Enterprises 44,90,484/- 4. M/s Keval Enterprises 10,06,352/- 5. M/s. R.S. Enterprises 47,25,023/- TOTAL 1,85,10,9807- Disallowance : 12.5% of Rs. 1,85,10,980 amounting to Rs. 23,13,873/- 3. On the facts of the case and without prejudice to the above, the Learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming disallowance @ 12.5 % of the alleged bogus wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 23,13,873/-. The purchases, as given below, were disallowed on the grounds that the same were "bogus" as notices issued to the parties were returned back unserved by the postal authorities. The assessee was asked to produce the parties personally and to confirm the purchases but the assessee did not discharge the responsibilities as the onus squarely lies with him. The assessee's submissions were not considered. In view of these facts, the purchases were treated as not genuine and disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee after adopting 12.5% of the bogus purchases as under: Sr.no. Name of Party Amount (in Rs.) 1. M/s. Ankit Enterprises 42,59,263/- 2. M/s. Maulik Steel Corporation 40,29,858/- 3. M/s. Vai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the appellant got relief of Rs. 1,61,97,107 (Rs. 1,85,10,980/- - Rs. 23,13,873/-). The appellant also relied on the decisions in the cases of Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs it P Sheth ,356 ITR 451 and M/s. Bholenath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. Vs AO, 355 ITR 290. In the decisions the GP/NP should be adopted to decide just type of cases. CIT V/s. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) Held, dismissing the appeal, that whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly ma.de were bogus was essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and sell the finished fabrics. Therefore, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before the ITAT. 7. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the records. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice. Hence, this appeal is disposed off by hearing the ld. DR and perusing the records. 8. We find that credible and cogent information was received in this case by the assessing officer that certain accommodation entry provider/bogus suppliers were being used by certain parties to obtained bogus bills. The assessee was found to have taken accommodation entry/bogus purchase bills during the concerned assessment year from different parties. Based upon this information assessment was reopened. The credibility of information relating to reopening remains un-assailed. In such factual scenario, the assessing officer has ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 801 and Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. In the present case, the assessee wants that the unassailable fact that the suppliers are non-existent and thus bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above apex court decisions. 11. We further find that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nikunj Enterprises has upheld 100% allowance for the purchases when the sales have not been doubted. However, the facts of that case were different. Furthermore, the sales in that case were basically to government departments. Hence, the ratio from this decision is not applicable on the facts of the case. 12. In these circumstances, the ld. Departmenta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
