9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Revenue by: Smt. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak Assessee by: Ms. Rutuja N. Pawar ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. Captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order dated 16th July 2018, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 30, Mumbai, pertaining to the assessment year 2007 08 and 2011 12. However, in the present appeal, we are concerned with assessment year 2007 08 only. 2. The dispute in the present appeal is confined to the reduction of addition made on account of non genuine purchases to 5%. 3. Brief facts are, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e purchases are not genuine. However, relying upon the decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P. Sheth, [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.), the Assessing Officer estimated the profit on the non genuine purchases @ 20% and accordingly added back an amount of ₹ 18,73,607. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid addition, the assessee preferred appeal before the first appellate authority. 4. After considering the submissions of the assessee and having found that while deciding identical nature of dispute in assessee s own case in assessment years 2006 07, 2009 10, 2010 11 and 2011 12, the Tribunal has restricted the addition to 5% of the non genuine purchases, learned Commissioner (Appeals) followed the same and dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal after considering all aspects of the issue including the percentage of profit generated in this particular line of business carried on by the assessee had ultimately held that the profit on non genuine purchases should be estimated @ 5%. It is relevant to observe, learned Commissioner (Appeals) s decision in respect of assessment year 2011 12 in the impugned order, in the meanwhile, has been upheld by the Tribunal while deciding the cross appeals by the assessee and Revenue in the appeal being ITA no.1326/Mum./2016 and ITA no.1208/Mum./2016, in the order cited supra. There being no material change in facts of the present case, respectfully following the decision of the Co ordinate Bench cited supra in assessee s own case, we up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
