9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the non genuine purchases. Therefore, the dispute now is only with regard to the profit rate to be applied for estimating the income on non genuine purchases. After considering the overall facts and circumstances of this particular case we are of the considered opinion that estimation of profit @ 5% of the alleged non genuine purchases would be reasonable. We direct the assessing officer to restrict the addition in both the Assessment Years under appeal to 5% of the non genuine purchases. We make it clear, our aforesaid decision is purely on the basis of facts involved in the present appeals. - ITA no. 2211, 2212/Mum/2018 - - - Dated:- 14-12-2018 - SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY AND SHRI N.K. PRA DHAN , JJ. Appellant by : Shri Jitendra Singh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ars 2010-11 are not genuine as they were made from concerns / parties who have been identified as hawala operators by the Sales tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, the assessing officer reopened the assessment for both the assessment years under section 147 of the Act. During the assessment proceedings the assessing officer called upon the assessee to produce necessary evidences to prove the genuineness of the purchases. As observed by the assessing officer, the assessee was unable to produce delivery challans, transport documents etc. to prove delivery of goods. The notices issue by the assessing officer under section 133 (6) of the Act to ascertain the genuineness of the purchases also returned unserved due to unavailability of the part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conclusively prove that the purchases claimed to have been made from the declared source are genuine. However, the departmental authorities have not disputed the sales effected by the assessee, meaning thereby, the assessee might have purchased the goods from some unknown parties/source. For this reason alone the assessing officer has estimated the profit at 12.5% of the non genuine purchases. Therefore, the dispute now is only with regard to the profit rate to be applied for estimating the income on non genuine purchases. After considering the overall facts and circumstances of this particular case we are of the considered opinion that estimation of profit @ 5% of the alleged non genuine purchases would be reasonable. Accordingly, we dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
