9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder dated 27/02/2019, we are of the considered view that the assessee has failed to make out a case of prima-facie mistake apparent on record, which could be rectified u/s 254(2). Further, what the assessee seeking is to review the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the given facts and circumstances of the case and also by following the decision of co-ordinate bench in assessee s own case for earlier assessment years, which is not permissible u/s 254(2) of the I.T.Act, 1961. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in miscellaneous application filed by the assessee and accordingly, the same is dismissed. - M.A. No.340/Mum/2019 (Arising out of ITA No.990/Mum/2018) - - - Dated:- 28-8-2019 - Shri Mahavir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal have given clear cut indication, of proposed addition; our AR did not farther argue the case. b. We have submitted two order of Hon'ble ITAT and wherein applicability of section 69C was discussed and both the cases had direct link with the facts of the matter. But, the cases do not find place in order of Hon'ble ITAT. Nor it has been discussed as to how same are not applicable to our case. c. 3.We had submitted order of the Hon'ble ITAT delivered in case of Parekh Corporation UI Building (32 CCH 129) and it had decided the similar issue- Points Number)4 and 15 of submission of the assessee deal with the above issue only. For the kind perusal of the bench we are reproducing the paragraphs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assesses for such financial year. The bedrock for making an addition under section 69C is that there must have been some expenditure incurred by the , the source of which is not disclosed. If our such expenditure is recorded in the books of accounts, there cannot he any reason to invoke the provisions of section 69C of the Act. In that view of the matter is it is held shut provisions of section 69C were strongly restore by the AO for making this addition. d. It Is also submitted in our written submission, we have emphasized that Rajendra Jain, the alleged hawala trader had retracted his statements. Retraction of the statement by Rajendra Jain is a vital and important fact to decide our appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evant paragraphs of the order passed for the earlier year are reproduced as under, 7. Now, coining lo the merit of the addition, we found that allegation of the AO was as per information from the Sales Tax Department assessee has taken accommodation purchases- However, the corresponding sales have not been denied by the AO. Without purchases there cannot be sale. Therefore, adding entire amount of purchases in assessee's income is not justified. 8. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, visa-vis nature of assessee's business, I restrict addition to the extent of 12,5% of such bogus purchases. f. In the Order of Hon'ble ITAT it is mentioned t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined to be considered by Hon'ble Bench. h. It was also brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Bench that the Sales Tax department had accepted these transactions as genuine transactions, as we had submitted VAT returns before the Sales tax authorities. Point 10 of our submission deals with this very crucial aspect but it remained to be considered by Hon'ble ITAT. i. Non consideration of the fact going to the root of the issue is a mistake apparent from record, as envisaged by the provisions of section 254(2)of the Act . 3. We have heard both the parties and perused miscellaneous application filed by the assessee, along with order of the Tribunal dated 27/02/2019 in ITA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
