9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opening of assessment - HELD THAT:- Since no arguments have been advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee thus, this ground is not adjudicated. Bogus purchases - assessee has obtained accommodation entries from dealer namely M/s.Raj Traders which is listed in the Sales Tax Department website and declared as hawala entry provider by the Sales Tax Department and provided accommodation entries without delivery of goods - HELD THAT:- Addition was made solely based on the information from the Sales Tax Department and its website showing the dealer namely M/s. Raj Traders as accommodation entry provider. There is nothing on record to suggest that the purchases made by the assessee from M/s. Raj Traders is non-genuine except relying on the Sales Tax Department website showing M/s. Raj Traders as hawala dealer. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the Ld. CIT(A) made enquires with the dealer to prove that the purchases made by the assessee are not genuine. AO did not issue notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act to the dealer to verify the genuineness of the transactions. It has been noticed earlier in the A.Y. 2009-10 the Assessing Officer deputed the Inspector to verify the genuineness of the tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 68/-. It was submitted that electrical appliances/fittings were used in its new office premises and the same were capitalised in the books of accounts under the head "Furniture and Fixtures" and claimed depreciation of ₹.741/-. Therefore, it was contended that the transaction with M/s. Rahul Traders are genuine. 5. The Assessing Officer to verify the genuineness of these details deputed Inspector to visit the premises of M/s. Mehul Traders and M/s.Rahul Traders as mentioned in the bills/invoices. The Inspector submitted his report on 19.03.2013 observing that both M/s. Mehul Traders and M/s. Rahul Traders could not be located and no business activities were carried on in the given address. It was reported by the Inspector that the address as mentioned in the bills of M/s. Mehul Traders is only a residential premises. Inspector in his report stated that the address on the invoices given by M/s. Rahul Traders is an industrial area and he could not found the address of the M/s. Rahul Traders. Thus, based on the report of the Inspector, Assessing Officer treated the purchases as not verifiable and therefore genuineness of the purchases could not be established. Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so verified the details of M/s Mehul Traders & M/s Rahul Traders on the https://mahavat.gov.in/, which has been renamed as https://mahagst.gov.in/ and found that both the parties are appearing in the list of "Suspicious Dealers", who have issued false bills without delivery of goods. The details contained on the said website of Maharashtra Government are extracted below:- list of Suspicious Dealers who has issued false bills without delivery of goods. Disclaimer: If any dealer whose name is published has any grievances he should contact the Office of DC Vigilance at, A-l, 8th Floor, Old Bldg, Vikrikar Bhavan, Mazgaon, Mumbai-400010. Sr.No TIN Name Of Hawala Dealer 92 27590509892V RAHUL TRADERS 1215 27260365107V MEHUL TRADERS Thus, even as on date, both the parties namely, M/s Mehul Traders & M/s Rahul Traders are proven accommodation entry providers, which have just issued false bills without delivery of any goods. Hence, the Ground No. 1 of the present appeal is dismissed. 5.6 The Ground of Appeal No. 2 is without prejudice to the 1st Ground of Appeal. In this Ground, the Appellant has contended that the Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing a s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of the assessee treated entire purchases of ₹.9,48,151/- as non-genuine for the only reason that M/s. Raj Traders has been declared as hawala dealer by Sales Tax Department, Mumbai, providing accommodation entries without delivery of goods. On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition on the ground that M/s. Raj Traders is appearing as hawala entry provider in the website of the Sales Tax Department. 13. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has provided all the information to prove the genuineness of the purchases. It had furnished copies of purchase orders, invoices, ledger copies, bank statements and therefore the purchases were genuine. It is submitted that Assessee has discharged its burden to prove the genuineness of the transactions by furnishing all the necessary evidences. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that except relying on the Sales Tax Department website the Assessing Officer has not made any enquiry whatsoever to prove that the purchases made by assessee were not genuine. It is submitted that Assessing Officer has not at all justified in treating the purchases as non-genuine solely based on the information of the Sales ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
