TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inion, could not be sustained in the eyes of law. We hold that the purchases made by the assessee from M/s. Chemi Age Enterprises deserves to be accepted as genuine purchases and accordingly, we direct the ld. AO to delete 22.83% of ₹ 61,30,150/- straightaway. With regard to purchases made from other two parties, we hold that this Tribunal in a series of decisions have been constantly holding that adoption of profit at 12.5% on the value of such purchase would meet the ends of justice. Respectfully following the various decisions of this Tribunal, we direct the ld. AO to adopt 12.5% of value and purchases of ₹ 32,723/- and ₹ 3,50,147/- from M/s. Sumukh Corporation and M/s. International Trade Agency respectively. Accordingly, the original grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed. - ITA No.6951/Mum/2017 - - - Dated:- 24-4-2019 - Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM And Shri M. Balaganesh, AM For the Assessee : Shri Dharmesh Shah And Shri Dhaval Shah For the Revenue : Shri Ashutosh Rajhans ORDER PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.6951/Mum/2017 for A.Y. 2009-10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the said additional ground, all the facts are available on the record. 6. Accordingly, it is humbly prayed that the enclosed additional ground may kindly be admitted and adjudicated upon by Your Honours. It is a settled position in law that the Hon'ble Tribunal has powers to consider a claim of the appellant emanating from the assessment proceedings, although not raised earlier. In this regard, the appellant relies upon the following landmark decisions of the Hon'ble Courts. i. National Thermal Power Corporation v. CIT [229 ITR 383 (SC)] ii.Jute Corporation of India Ltd. V. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC)] iii. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. V. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB)] iv. CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers Shareholders [349 ITR 336 (Bom)] 7. In view of the above, it is most humbly submitted that the enclosed additional ground may kindly be admitted and adjudicated upon by Your Honour. 2.2. This additional ground was raised together with a petition framed for admission of additional grounds of appeal explaining the reasons thereon that it goes to the root of the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etc. The return of income for the A.Y.2009-10 was filed by the assessee company on 29/09/2009 declaring total income of ₹ 8,32,10,070/-. The assessment was originally completed u/s.143(1) of the Act. Later, the assessment was sought to be reopened by issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act based on the information obtained from Sales Tax Department that certain charges were involved in supplying bogus bills to various persons through the assistance of various entry operators and that assessee was found to be one such person to whom the said bills were supplied. Notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 23/05/2013 was issued to the assessee and assessee in response to that submitted on 04/06/2013 that the original return filed u/s.139(1) of the Act may be treated as return in response to notice u/s.148 of the Act. 3.2. The ld. AO sought to verify the veracity of the purchases made from aforesaid three parties by the assessee by issuing notice u/s.133(6) of the Act. The status of such notices u/s.133(6) that were sent are tabulated as under:- Sr. No Name Amount 133(6) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the ld. AO, an affidavit executed on 21/01/2014 was also furnished from M/s. Chemi Age Enterprises confirming the genuineness of transactions with the assessee to the tune of ₹ 61,30,150/-. 3.5. The assessee stated that the other two parties are not traceable and hence, no additional documents in the form of affidavit could be filed from them before the ld. AO and accordingly, requested ld. AO to tax the profit element embedded thereon by adopting the rate at 12.5% of the value of the transactions. 3.6. Ld. AO observed that assessee was able to obtain confirmation and affidavit from M/s. Chemi Age Enterprises and could not produce the said party before him. The ld. AO also observed that assessee had shown the gross profit of ₹ 9,80,11,806/- against sales of ₹ 42,93,97,670/- which comes to 22.83% of gross profit from its business activities. Accordingly, the ld. AO applied the very same GP rate at 22.83% on the total value of purchases made from the aforesaid three parties in the sum of ₹ 65,13,020/- and made an addition of ₹ 14,86,922/- in the assessment which was upheld by the ld. CIT(A). 4. Aggrieved, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
