TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Group and they were subjected to search proceedings. Therefore, we inclined to accept the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Bogus purchases - CIT(A) has agreed with the findings of the Assessing Officer that certain transactions entered by the assessee with Frontline Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. and Rajat Diamond Pvt. Ltd are non-genuine - HELD THAT:- We are of the opinion that the purchases are no doubt bogus at the same time, the Revenue has accepted the sales/stock declared by the assessee. Therefore, we are in agreement with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that as decided by various Hon ble High Courts held that the additional benefit acquired by the assessee in this transaction can be brought to tax not the entire value of alleged bogus purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SS. The assessment was completed on 19.03.2015 u/s 144 of the Act and assessing total income of ₹ 9,26,64,120/-. Subsequently, the case was reopened u/s 148 by recording reasons and AO issued notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2016 and served on the assessee. In response, the Ld. AR of the assessee filed the relevant information as called for. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that in the original assessment, the entire amount of ₹ 9,17,59,464/- shown as sundry creditors were added as total income of the assessee. Even in re-assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the purchases as given by M/s Frontline Diamond Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Rajat Diamond Pvt. Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has filed the remand report dated 01.03.2018. After considering the remand report and submission from the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the unsecured loan received from Rajat Diamonds. After considering the detailed submission and remand report of the Assessing Officer he observed that the nature and source of loan transaction of ₹ 7,00,000/- was properly explained by the assessee with the help of various judicial decisions. 5. With regard to addition of unsecured loans by treating the same as accommodation entry relating to bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) reduce the quantum of addition made by the Assessing Officer from ₹ 9,26,64,120/- to ₹ 3,67,37,842/- by emanating the parties with whom assessee has produced the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has taken accommodation entries from concerns operated by Shri Gautam Jain group of companies. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has failed to upheld the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.K. Proteins Ltd. v. DCIT in SLP (Civil) No. 769/2017 dt. 16.01.2017 where 100% addition was confirmed by the Apex Court. 7. Considered the submissions of the Ld. DR and material on record. We notice that Assessing Officer has merely proceeded to make addition of ₹ 7,00,000/- unsecured loans merely because the Rajat Group of Companies involved in the transaction of bogus purchases and rejected the evidences submitted before him i.e. assessee has submitted the confirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
