TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e issue and after applying the same to the facts of the case, confirmed the addition to the extent of 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. Nothing was placed before us so as to persuade us to deviate from the findings of the CIT(A). Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A) for upholding addition of 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases. - Decided against assessee. - ITA NO.6661/MUM/2018 - - - Dated:- 2-3-2020 - Shri R.C. Sharma, Accountant Member And Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Satishchandra Rajore ORDER PER R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- 6, Mumbai dated 06/0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax authorities that they were engaged only in issuing hawala bills and no goods were ever supplied by them. After weighing the evidence pros and cons, I find that the appellant has not reconciled the purchases with the items sold and failed to reconcile 1:1 of the items purchased and sold. Onus is always on the appellant to prove as to how the material purchased was firstly obtained. I record a finding of fact here that the appellant failed to furnish crucial evidences like proof of delivery of purchases, transport challans and goods inward register at godown etc., either before the Ld. AO or before me. Thus, it can be safely presumed that either they are non-existent or even if they did exist, they were not backed by sufficient evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o prove that it is within the taxing provision and if a receipt is in the nature of income, the burden to prove that it is not taxable because it falls within exemption provided by the Act, lies upon the assessee. In the case of Durgaprasad More (supra), the Honorable Court went on to add that a party who relies on a recital in a Deed has to establish the truth of this recital, otherwise it will be very easy to make self-serving statements in documents either executed or taken by a party who relied on those recitals. If all that an assessee who wants to evade tax has to have some recitals made in a document either executed by him or executed in his favour then the door will be left wide open to evade tax. The Hon'ble Court further held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re cannot be any doubt that onus as a determining factor comes into play where, either there is no evidence on either side, or where it is equally worthless or where it is equally balanced. It is imperative to mention here that where such is not the case and all available evidence is considered, without reference to the onus and without relying on the circumstances that onus lies on a particular party, the issue is determined on facts and the onus cannot be said to have influenced the decisions. However, in the instant case, the appellant has miserably failed to lead evidence. 8.3.5 In the present case, AO concluded that the assessee indulged in nongenuine transaction and intention of indulging in such activity is to suppress the true ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ight parties who are said to be hawala operators, who are indulged in providing bogus bills without supply of any material. Under these circumstances, as the appellant could not prove his claim of purchases debited to the profit loss account, there is no other way to the AO, but to estimate the profit element embedded on such purchases. As stated earlier, the facts of the present case are exactly similar to the cited case and respectfully following the above cited decision, the action of the AO in estimating the addition @12,5% on the total purchases from the eight parties is confirmed. The AO, in the assessment order, has further mentioned that the AR of the assessee had agreed for the addition of 12.5% of hawala purchases. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|