9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and similar grounds have been raised by the assessee in all the three appeals assailing the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are disposed of vide this common order. 2. The assessee is an individual and is engaged in trading of steel. On the basis of information received from Sales Tax Department, reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee in the impugned assessment years. During the course of reassessment proceedings the assessee did not co-operate with the Assessing Officer and failed to furnish the requisite details and information, therefore, the Assessing Officer was constrained to invoke the provisions of section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee is in second appeal before the Tribunal assailing the findings of First Appellate Authority. 3. Shri S.D. Pathak appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer made addition of the entire purchases made by assessee from the alleged hawala dealers. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has confirmed the findings of Assessing Officer in toto. Even if it is presumed that the assessee has made purchases from hawala dealers there cannot be addition of entire bogus purchases. The addition, if any can be made on the basis of GP ratio. The assessee in assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 has declared GP ratio of 2.92%, 3.27% and 4.92%, respectively. There has been consistent increase in the GP ratio decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the accommodation entries of such purchases. c) In reaching to the conclusion and confirming such addition made by the AO, the Id. CIT(A) omitted to consider relevant factors, considerations, principles and evidences while he was overwhelmed, influenced and prejudiced by irrelevant considerations and factors. d) Without prejudice, the rate or percentage of profit element embedded in such purchases as fixed by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) is excessive and unreasonable on the facts of the case. 3. The Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that levy of interest u/s.234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is mandatory. The Appellant denies its liability for such interest. 4. The Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that the ground raised disputing initia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods receipt note showing movement of the goods were produced by assessee either before the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Ample opportunity was granted by Assessing Officer to furnish stock register and confirmations from the parties. The same were also not filed by the assessee. In the absence of any information the authorities below have rightly made addition of the entire bogus purchases. 5. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has made purchases from certain firms which have been declared as hawala dealers. Such firms only provide books entries without carrying out any act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
