9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) TMI 1632 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the disputed to the file of the A.O to verify and examine the facts and apply the Ratio of the decisions. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member And Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, CA For the Respondent : Shri Aktar H. Ansari, SR. DR ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE - JM: The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of CIT(A)-36, Mumbai passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 and 250 of the Act for the A.Y 2010-11. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. CIT(A) -36, Mumbai erred in confirming the addition of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d assessment because, the assessee has obtained the bogus purchases bills from the parties as per the information in the website of Sales Tax Department Govt of Maharashtra. The DGIT(Inv) Wing, Mumbai had forwarded the list of beneficiaries information who obtained the bogus purchases bills. Hence, the A.O has issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. The Ld. AR of the assessee filed a letter dated 16.03.2015 to treat the revised return of income as compliance. Subsequently, Notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. The A.O found that the assessee has obtained the bogus purchase bills from Shri Durga Steels of ₹ 19,12,716/-.The Ld. AR appeared from time to time and filed the details of bank statements, ledger copy of party and othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ported the CIT(A) order. 4.We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the A.O irrespective of the fact and submissions that, the assessee has maintained GP ratio of 7.58% in the financial year and the same has to be applied for the bogus purchases. The Ld. AR emphasized that for the Assessment year 2011-12, the Hon ble ITAT has relied on the decision of Pr.CIT Vs. Md. Haji Adam Co(Supra) and restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with directions. We fallow the judicial precedence and Jurisdictional Bombay High Court decision of Pr.CIT Vs. Md. Haji Adam Co. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
