9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in restricting the addition made on account of bogus purchase to 6% of total bogus purchases ignoring the fact that the Sales Tax Department has proved beyond doubt that the parties declared as hawala traders were involved in providing accommodation entry of purchases and the assessee was one of the beneficiary of accepting accommodation entry for the purchase". 2. "Whether On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the assessee failed to produce the parties for verification, in spite of opportunity-provided by the Assessing Officer". 3. "Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in restricting th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined bogus purchases entries which are in the nature of non-genuine purchases from the dealers. The A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance, Ld.AR of the assessee appeared from time to time and submitted the details and also a letter dated 19.04.2017 was filed to treat the return of income filed originally on 29.09.2011 as due compliance to notice. The assessee was provided with the reasons for re-opening of the assessment and notice u/s 143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act was issued. 3. The assessee has submitted the available information in respect of purchases. The AO found that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from two parties aggregating to Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the assessment proceedings. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 6. We heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue as envisaged by the Ld.DR that the CIT(A) has restricted the addition to the extent of 6% of the bogus purchases considering profit element embedded. We found that the CIT(A) has dealt on the facts and the Hon'ble High Court decisions and took a view referred at Para 4 to 7 of the order. We find the Jurisdictional Hon'ble High Court in the case of Pooja Paper Trading Co. Vs. ITO, (104 taxmann.com 95) and Hon'ble Gujarat High court in CIT Vs. Simit P Sheth (2013) (356 ITR 451) has considered the profit element and the income was estimated. We find the Ld.CIT(A) too ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
