9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1130X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee stands dismissed. Addition of commission expenditure in order to obtain such accommodation entries - assessment year 2014-15 - HELD THAT:- The assessee had obtained accommodation entries of ₹.75,789/- from M/s. Sun Diam, Surat for which commission was paid to the accommodation provider. Since the very nature of business of the accommodation entry provider was to earn ‘commission income’ from the beneficiaries, who had obtained accommodation entries from them, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer has reasonably estimated the commission of ₹.10,000/- for two bogus bills obtained by the assessee @ ₹.5,000/- per bill, which was rightly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). - Decided against assessee - I.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 143(2) of the Act dated 19.12.2017 was issued to the assessee. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the assessment under section 144 r.w.s. 145A r.w.s. 147 of the Act was completed by assessing the total taxable income at ₹.41,03,890/- by making disallowance of 25% of purchase made from Arihant Exports treating it as bogus purchase to the extent of ₹.1,33,664/- [25% of ₹.5,34,656/-]. 2.1 Similarly, the purchases made from M/s. Sun Diam at ₹.75,789/- has been treated as bogus purchase and brought to tax in the assessment year 2014-15. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the materials available on record and in the absence of material evidence towa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... btained such accommodation entries of bogus purchases also contained the details of such accommodation entries availed of by the assessee. The assessee had made bogus purchases from M/s. Arihant Exports, Surat for a sum of ₹.5,34,056/-. On being confronted about the bogus purchases, the assessee submitted that the impugned purchases were made and the corresponding sales were also effected and further submitted that if purchases were bogus then the sales of the same could not have been made. Since the assesse could not produce the intermediary from whom the purchase from M/S Arihant Exports was made in the assessment year 2013-14. From the facts and circumstances, the Assessing Officer observed that M/s. Arihant Exports had only prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 2014-15 also, upon the post search and seizure action conducted on 03.10.2013 revealed that the assessee made bogus purchases from M/s. Sun Diam. Surat, a company controlled by Shri Rajendra Jain Group by taking accommodation entries for a sum of ₹ 75.789/-. The assessee could not produce the parties/intermediaries for verification. Moreover, the assessee could not produce sufficient evidence to prove the genuineness of purchases made from M/s. Sun Diam. Even the payments through account payee cheques were not found sacrosanct. Further, it had been admitted in the statements recorded by the investigation wing, Mumbai that cheques were issued by the beneficiary parties against the bogus sale bills issued by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned accommodation entries of ₹.75,789/- from M/s. Sun Diam, Surat for which commission was paid to the accommodation provider. Since the very nature of business of the accommodation entry provider was to earn commission income from the beneficiaries, who had obtained accommodation entries from them, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer has reasonably estimated the commission of ₹.10,000/- for two bogus bills obtained by the assessee @ ₹.5,000/- per bill, which was rightly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 9. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on the 29th January, 2019 in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
