9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal") for AY 2009-10 reads as under:- "1. Learned CIT(Appeal) erred in confirming the profit element to 25% and erred in treating the same as bogus purchase .. 2. Learned CIT(Appeal) erred in ignoring the detailed evidences brought on record and ignoring the judicial precedents brought to his knowledge. 3. Learned assessing officer erred in rejecting the prices of Purchased Goods on summarise and conjecture basis and Learned CIT(Appeal) erred in confirming the same." The assessee has raised similar grounds of appeal for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 filed with the tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is proprietor of the firm „UMA Arts‟ engaged in the business of work contractor for furniture and fixtures , civil and electrical fittings and related job work . The information was received by the A.O from sales tax department through DGIT (Inv), Mumbai regarding alleged bogus purchases made by the assessee from hawala dealers wherein the assessee appeared as one of the beneficiaries of the accommodation bills issued by said hawala dealers. The case of the assessee was reopened by the A.O u/s. 147 by issuing notices u/s. 148 on 18th March ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Universal Supplier, M/s Paras Enterprises and M/s Nidhi Industries in the above mentioned case. On inquiry, it is gathered that the above parties are not existing at the given address." The A.O asked the assessee to produce stock register which was not produced by the assessee . The A.O also observed that the assessee has not been able to draw a direct co-relation between the purchases made from the bogus parties and the utilisation in the course of business . It was also observed by the AO that the transport proof, delivery challans, transport expenses proof , stock register etc. could not be produced by the assessee. Thus, the AO concluded that genuineness of purchases could not be proved and additions to the tune of 100% of the purchases to the tune of Rs. 67,02,550/- were made by the AO vide assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. 4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). The assessee contended before ld. CIT(A) that the purchases are genuine and it was submitted that the assessee brought on record ledger account of these parties , copies of bills , bank statements showing payments made through bank, delivery challans duly stamp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial and its correlations with sales were submitted before the A.O. . At this point of time Bench directed assessee to file paper book as to the documents which were submitted before the authorities below to prove utilisation/consumption of material and also its correlation with sales. The assessee has submitted paper book running into 472 pages after closure of hearing but the assessee has not certified the paper book as to which document were submitted before A.O and which document were submitted before the learned CIT-A. The learned DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 6. We have considered rival contentions and carefully perused the material on record . The assessee is proprietor of the firm „UMA Arts‟ engaged in the business of work contractor for furniture and fixtures , civil and electrical fittings and related job work . The information was received by the A.O from sales tax department through DGIT (Inv), Mumbai regarding alleged bogus purchases made by the assessee from hawala dealers wherein the assessee appeared as one of the beneficiaries of the accommodation bills issued by said hawala dealers. The case of the assessee was reopened by the A.O u/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Trading Co., M/s. Ruby Impex, M/s Mark Enterprises, M/s Universal Supplier, M/s Paras Enterprises and M/s Nidhi Industries in the above mentioned case. On inquiry, it is gathered that the above parties are not existing at the given address." The A.O asked the assessee to produce stock register which was not produced by the assessee . The A.O also observed that the assessee has not been able to draw a direct co-relation between the purchases made from the bogus parties and the utilisation in the course of business . It was also observed by the AO that the transport proof, delivery challans, transport expenses proof , stock register etc could not be produced by the assessee. Thus, the AO concluded that genuineness of purchases could not be proved and additions to the tune of 100% of the purchases to the tune of Rs. 67,02,550/- were made by assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. The assessee contended before learned CIT(A) in first appeal that the purchases are genuine and it was submitted before learned CIT(A) that the assessee brought on record ledger account of these parties , copies of bills , bank statements showing payments made through bank, delivery challan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material has been filed by the assessee before the AO . The assessee was directed to file paper book before the bench which is now filed by the assessee in two volumes running into 472 pages. The assessee has not filed any certificate with the paper book that these documents have been filed before the A.O and / or learned CIT(A) and from the careful perusal of these document filed in paper book before us , we could not find that the assessee has co-related purchases with the sales and utilisation/ consumption of the material was proved by the assessee before the authorities below. No, doubt large number of documents are filed before us running into 472 pages in paper book filed in two volumes. These documents need verification and authentication by the authorities below . Thus, keeping in view interest of justice and fair play it is deemed fit and appropriate that the matter need to be set aside and restored to the file of the A.O for fresh determination of the issue on merits de-novo in accordance with law as we are of the considered view that the assessee so far could not prove utilisation / consumption of material and genuineness of the purchases but since large number of eviden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
