9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1130X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firmation of addition on the application of section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short] for the assessment year 2014-15, the assessee also challenged confirmation of disallowance of bogus purchases for both the assessment years. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in jewellery business and had filed its return of income for the assessment year 2013-14 on 28.09.2013 admitting a total income of Rs..39,70,140/-. Subsequently, there was reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for this assessment year. Therefore, the case was reopened by issue of notice under section 148 of the Act dated 25.01.2017 which was duly served on the assessee. In response to the same, the assessee file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t year 2013-14 and M/s. Sun Diam in the assessment year 2014-15 without having any direct evidence, which resulted addition in both the assessment years and prayed for deleting the same. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of authorities below. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. During the course of search and seizure action conducted on 03.10.2013 by the Office of the DDlT (Investigation), Unit-I, Mumbai in the case of Shri Rajendra Jain Group, Shri Sanjay Choudhary Group and Shri Dharmichand Jain Group, it had come to light that they were operating and managing benami concerns in the names of their employees through which, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided under section 144 of the Act by relying upon the decision in the case of M/s Sanjay Oil Cake industries vs. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj) where under identical facts, 25% disallowance on bogus/unverifiable purchase was held as reasonable and disallowed 25% of unverifiable purchase of Rs..5,34,656/- made from M/s Arihant Exports. The assessee preferred further appeal before the ld. CIT(A) in respect of the disallowance of Rs..1,33,664/-, which was confirmed being unverifiable purchase. Even before the Tribunal also, the assessee could not produce any material evidence of the parties/ intermediaries from whom the purchase from M/S Arihant Exports was made which could be verifiable. Under the above facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ries from whom the purchase from M/S Sun Diam was made which could be verifiable. Under the above facts and circumstances, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the authorities below. Thus the ground raised by the assessee stands dismissed. 7. With regard to the addition towards unexplained expenditure of Rs..10,000/- in the assessment year 2014-15, in order to obtain such accommodation entries, the assessee had also incurred commission expenditure. Such payment of commission in order to procure accommodation entries had been met out by the assessee out of cash lying outside the books of accounts. Therefore, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and disallowed the same. On appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
