9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Revenue : Shri Vijay Jaiswal, D.R. ORDER PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The above cross appeals one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue have been preferred against the order dated 13.08.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2011-12. 2. At the outset we would like to mention that neither assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r scrutiny after issuing and serving upon the assessee the statutory notices. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO on the basis of information received from Sales Department, Government of Maharashtra noted that assessee has made some bogus accommodation purchase entries from 21 parties as mentioned in page No. 2 of the assessment order. The AO in order to verify the genuineness of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) applied a GP rate of 12.5% on the said bogus purchases by following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) and thus partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) the assessee as well as Revenue is in appeal before us. 7. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o 4%. Though the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly followed the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (supra), however, the rate applied is on the higher side. We are, therefore, of the view that it would be reasonable if the GP rate @ 5% is applied on the said bogus purchases to bring the additional income on bogus purchases to tax which the assessee may have made by pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
