TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /MUM/2019 - - - Dated:- 11-1-2021 - C. N. Prasad , Member ( J ) And N. K. Pradhan , Member ( A ) For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Smita Verma ORDER C. N. Prasad , Member ( J ) 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai [hereinafter in short Ld. CIT(A) ] dated 24.12.2018 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The only grievance of the Revenue in its appeal is Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the disallowance of purchases to 12.5% as against the entire purchases disallowed as non-genuine/bogus by the Assessing Officer. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that, the assessee engaged in the business of Civil construction Developer fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the finding of the Assessing Officer that assessee has not submitted any documentary evidences with regard to the movement of goods of so called doubtful purchases. Assessing Officer observed that the notices issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act to the party was returned unserved with a remark Left and the assessee has not produced the parties before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, Assessing Officer treated entire purchases of ₹ 4,38,284/- as non-genuine and added to the income of the assessee. On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) considering the evidences and various submissions of the assessee restricted the disallowance to an extent of 12.5% of the non-genuine purchases. 4. Inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee for such financial year. As can be seen from the provision, for applying the section 69C, what is important is that there should be no explanation about the source of expenditure or that the explanation offered is not found satisfactory. In other words, the source of expenditure incurred for the expenditure in question is the heart of section 69C. Here in this case, the appellant furnished an explanation of source from his bank account along with supporting evidence of purchase invoices and payment made for the said purchases by cheques. Therefore, in this case, the source of expenditure for purchases appearing in the books stands explained through the bank account. Therefore in invoking of section 69C in the present case is not pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mumbai, has upheld estimation out of alleged bogus purchases instead of addition of total purchases. 1. Salim Ebrahim Petiwala v/s. Ito 17(3)(2) ITA No. 4772/Mum/2017 2. Tubes India v/s. Asst CIT Circle 19(3) ITA No. 2230 to 2232/Mum/2016 3. The ACIT 19(2) v/s. M/s. Nocil Steels ITA No. 4505/Mum/2015 4. Satish R. Rathod v/s. ITO 15(3)(1) ITA No. 567/Mum/2016 5. Vinod H. Sanghvi v/s. DCIT 15(2)(Old) ITA No. 125 to 127/Mum/2016 6. M/s. Pentagon System and Services P. Ltd. v/s. DCIT (OSD) Cir 2(3) ITA No. 4804/Mum/2015 7. Turnkey Electrical Engineers P. Ltd. v/s. DCIT 7(3) ITA No. 1936, 1937, 1938 1939/Mum/2015 8. Montex Glass Fibre v/s. DCIT 2(2) ITA No. 1520/Mum/2017 9. R.A. Industrial Metals v/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
