9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2012 by proposing the following two questions stated to be substantial questions of law:- "(A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts by confirming the decision of CIT(A) restricting the addition on account of bogus purchases to 25% of total addition of Rs. 5,67,49,767/-? (B) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts by confirming the decision of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,13,84,071/- on account of undisclosed income admitted during the course of survey proceedings?" 2. The assessment year is 2008-09 and the corresponding accounting period is the previous year 2007-08. 3. During the course of search/survey action in the case of edible oil group and agents, it was found that M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... placing reliance on judicial pronouncements, made addition of Rs. 5,67,49,767/- to the total claim of the assessee under the head bogus purchases. Being aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as "the Commissioner (Appeals)] wherein the addition came to be restricted to 25% of the alleged bogus purchases. Revenue went in appeal before the Tribunal, but did not succeed. 5. Insofar as the proposed question (B) is concerned, in the statement recorded during the course of survey, the partner of the assessee had admitted undisclosed income of Rs. 1,13,84,071/- for assessment year 2008-09. However, the assessee did not include the same in the return of income. During the cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal was not justified in upholding the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 6.1 Insofar as the proposed question (B) is concerned, it was submitted that the Tribunal has not given any finding on this issue. It was, accordingly, urged that the matter requires consideration on the questions as proposed or as may be deemed fit by this court. 7. This court has considered the submissions advanced by the learned senior standing counsel. 8. A perusal of the assessment order reveals that before the Assessing Officer, the assessee had not given any explanation in respect of the bogus purchases. However, during the course of appellate proceedings, before the Commissioner (Appeals) the assessee had submitted its explanation and the rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h comes to Rs. 1,41,87,441/- and further directed the balance to be deleted. 9. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has upheld the order passed by him. 10. From the facts noted hereinabove, it is evident that while the purchases shown to be made from Vishal Traders were bogus, the respondent - assessee had in fact made purchases, which were duly reflected in the stock and there were corresponding sales. The Assessing Officer in the remand report has not been able to dispute that sales and the stock position. It is in these circumstances that the Commissioner (Appeals) has placed reliance upon the decision of this court in the case of Sanjay Oil Cake Industri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
