9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oo Respondent By : None ORDER By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the assessee seeks rectification of mistake u/s. 254(2) of the Income tax Act, in the order of this Tribunal , ITA No. 1423/Mum/2017 for assessment year 2011-12, dated 14.09.2017. 2. None appeared for the Revenue. I have heard the counsel for the assessee and perused the records. I find that by way of this miscellaneous application, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the order of the ITAT needs to be reconsidered. The submissions are summarised as under: 1) The appellant is a private limited company having its present office at 4 Annapurna Sadan, Behind Moonlight Shopping Centre, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East) M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ercentage 5.33%) 4) Thus your honour will observe that in similar such cases, the appropriate relief had been granted and in order to keep the uniformity of the various decisions it would be appropriate that this order be called and appropriate relief to the appellant be granted. 5) A grave undue hardship and irreparable loss would be caused to the applicant, by the order dated 14/09/2017 passed in the aforesaid appeal. The applicant therefore requests this Hon'ble Bench to reconsider/re-call the said order, reconsider the same on factual aspects, and do the justice to the Applicant in the matter. 6) The applicant hereby requests this Hon'ble Bench to condone the delay, if any, which had occurred in making this mis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same. Accordingly the AO took the view that the profit element involved in the impugned purchases should be assessed, which he estimated at 12.50% of the value of purchases on the basis of decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of Smit P Shah (356 ITR 451). The AO assessed the same and the Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal.4. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has furnished all the details in order to prove the genuineness of purchases by furnishing copies of purchase bills, payment details etc. The assessee has also proved that the said goods have been sold. He further submitted that the applicable VAT rate on most of the goods was only 5%. He submitted that the suppli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to 9.82%, a reduction of almost 6%. I notice that the turnover of the assessee has increased from ₹ 246 lakhs in the immediately preceding year to ₹ 426 lakhs. The increase in turnover may be one of the reasons for the fall in G.P, but another possibility is that the assessee might have inflated impugned purchases also. Hence I am of the view that there is no merit in the claim of the assessee. The tax authorities have estimated the profit that would have been made by the assessee on the value of alleged bogus purchases @ 12.50% and in my view, the same is reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above. Accordingly I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and hence uphold the same.7. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
