9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 739X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mon issues are involved, we are proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 1853/MUM/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 2. The grounds of appeal filed by the assessee read as under : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A), has erred in confirming the disallowance on account of purchases from alleged suspicious dealers to the extent of Rs. 7,59,122/- being 12. 5% of the purchases made from the said dealers. 2. The CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the impugned disallowance is not justified for various reasons and the purchases are duly supported by various details furnished by the appellant including the stock records and corresponding sales reflected in the bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee to explain and substantiate the genuineness and true nature of purchase transactions in which the assessee failed during original assessment proceedings. 4. The appellant prays that appeal is being filed because it is covered under the exception provided in para 10(e) of the amended instruction no.3 of 2018 dated 20.08.2018. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year (AY) 2009-10 on 03.10.2009 declaring total income of Rs. 9,83,250/-. On receipt of information from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that the assessee had obtained bogus purchase bills from the hawala parties amounting to Rs. 60,72,978/- (Vaishali Enterprises Rs. 30,74,342/- and Mau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, the entire claim of purchase from M/s. Maulik Steel Corporation of Rs. 29,98,636/-and 12.5% of claim of purchase from M/s. Vaishali Enterprises i.e. 12.5% of 30,74,342/-, which works out to Rs. 3,84,293/- is disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. The total disallowance, therefore, works out to Rs. 33,82,929/- (Rs. 29,98,636 + Rs. 3,84,293), which is added back to the total income of the assessee." 5. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that vide order dated 11.12.2018, the Ld. CIT(A) by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 461 (Guj) confirmed the disallowance @ 12.5% made by the AO in the case of pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounting to Rs. 2,92,93,288/-. On further appeal, the Hon'ble High Court modified the order of the Tribunal and directed for addition of entire bogus purchases. After hearing the counsels, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed by the assessee and confirmed the decision of the High Court for addition of entire income on account of bogus purchases. In the instant case, there was information from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that the assessee had obtained bogus purchase bills of Rs. 60,72,978/- from two hawala parties. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee filed before the AO copy of purchase bills of the said two parties and a chart showing corresponding sales details. In view of the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... & 1856/Mum/2019 for Assessment Year 2011- 12 & 2010-11 respectively, wherein the facts and circumstances are exactly identical and hence, taking a consistent view in these two appeals also, I estimate the profit rate at the rate of 8% and Assessing Officer is directed accordingly. The appeals of assessee are partly allowed as indicated above."
7.1 Facts being identical, we follow the above order of the Co-ordinate Bench and direct the AO to restrict the estimation of profit to 8% of the disputed purchases of Rs. 60,72,978/-.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 02/11/2020. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
