TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions of the assessee. As could be seen from the material on record, while deciding assessee’s appeal arising out of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) the Tribunal has directed the AO to adopt the profit rate on alleged bogus purchases @ 12.5% and thereafter reduce the gross profit already declared by the assessee to quantify the disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchases. Addition on account of difference in closing and opening stock - Held that:- Neither before the Assessing Officer nor before the first appellate authority the assessee appeared and reconciled the difference in closing and opening stock with supporting evidence. Therefore, there were no other options before the Departmental Authorities but to tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year under dispute, assessee filed its return of income on 1st February 2012, declaring total income of ₹ 1,98,54,230. During the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer on the basis of information obtained from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra, found that purchases to the tune of ₹ 5,72,52,238, made from five parties were not genuine as the concerned parties have been identified as hawala operators providing accommodation bills only. After confronting the aforesaid information obtained from the Sales Tax Department to the assessee the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to prove the genuineness of the purchases. Further, to verify the genuineness of purchases, the Assessing Officer issued notices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial on record, while deciding assessee s appeal arising out of the impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) the Tribunal has directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the profit rate on alleged bogus purchases @ 12.5% and thereafter reduce the gross profit already declared by the assessee to quantify the disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchases. In view of the aforesaid decision of the Co ordinate Bench on identical issue, we do not find any reason to deviate from the view taken therein. Accordingly, ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 6. In the result, Revenue s appeal is dismissed. ITA no.3477/Mum./2016 Assessee s Appeal 7. In this appeal, the assessee has raised three grounds. 8. Grounds no. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceedings and failed to reconcile the difference in closing and opening stock with supporting evidence, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) sustained the addition. 12. The learned Authorized Representative submitted that due to non communication of statutory notices and other unavoidable circumstances assessee was unable to appear before the Departmental Authorities and thereby failed to reconcile the difference in closing and opening stock. He submitted, given an opportunity, assessee will reconcile the difference before the Assessing Officer 13. The learned Departmental Representative doesn t have any objection if the issue is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. 14. Having considered the su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeared before the Assessing Officer nor complied to the queries raised by him, the Assessing Officer proceeded to reject the books of account and treating the purchases made of ₹ 1,10,27,763 as bogus added to the income of the assessee. 17. The assessee challenged the addition before the first appellate authority. However, since before the first appellate authority also neither the assessee appeared nor produced any evidence to prove the genuineness of purchases made, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the addition. 18. The learned Authorized Representative submitted, due to non communication of statutory notices and other unavoidable circumstances, the assessee was unable to appear before the Departmental Authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epresentative has placed reliance upon the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for assessment year 2010 11 in ITA no.2791/Mum./2017 and C.O. no.146/Mum./2017 dated 9th October 2017, however, on careful perusal of the said order of the Tribunal, it is observed that in the said case the assessee had appeared before the Departmental Authorities and particularly before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) the assessee had furnished supporting documentary evidences like copies of bills, delivery challans, ledger accounts, stock register cum details, quantity wise details, copy of bank statement showing payments through cheques, confirmation from the parties from whom purchases were made. Considering the documentary evidences filed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
