TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 657X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urchases. On the facts of the case, it was a fit case for estimation of income earned on these tainted purchases. We find the estimation of 12.5% to be fair and reasonable. No new material is before us to deviate from the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. Validity of reassessment proceedings - HELD THAT:- We find that original return was processed u/s. 143(1) and the case was reopened upon receipt of specific information from Sales Tax Authorities which indicated possible escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. Nothing more was required at this stage. Therefore, no infirmity could be found in the jurisdiction acquired by Ld. AO. Resultantly, the legal grounds as well as appeal stand dismissed. AY 2013-14 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as proceeded with after hearing learned DR who supported the orders of lower authorities. First, we take up appeal for AY 2009-10 which is against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [CIT(A)] dated 22/10/2019 on following grounds of appeal:- 1. The CIT(A) wrongly confirmed the re-opening the assessment which was only on the basis of third party satisfaction without AO applying his own judgment. 2. The CIT(A) wrongly confirmed the re-opening the assessment as valid though considering the facts the provisions are not applicable to facts of the case. 3. The CIT(A) wrongly confirmed the additions of an amount of ₹ 9090168 on assumption of twelve and half percentage profit on alleged bogus purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the genuineness of these purchases. 3.2 The assessee defended the suspicious purchases by adducing purchase and sales invoices. It was submitted that for every purchase of an item, there was a corresponding sale. Further, purchase and sales were of trading in nature. However, finding that primary onus to establish the genuineness of the purchase remained un-discharged since the assessee failed to produce any of the suppliers for confirmation of purchases, the Ld. AO proceeded to disallow these purchases. In affidavits/statements made by key persons of these concerns before Sales Tax Authorities, it was admitted that they have not done any genuine business. Therefore, a presumption was drawn by Ld. AO that the goods were procured from gre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y a tainted group. It was admitted by key persons of those concerns that they did not carry out any genuine business activities. During survey proceedings also, the assessee could not satisfactorily explain the purchases made during the year. The assessee could not produce any of the suppliers to prove the genuineness of the purchases. Hence the assessee was unable to discharge the primary onus of proving impugned purchases. On the facts of the case, it was a fit case for estimation of income earned on these tainted purchases. We find the estimation of 12.5% to be fair and reasonable. No new material is before us to deviate from the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. 5. So far as the validity of reassessment proceedings is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stock. Another addition of shortage of cash for ₹ 13.34 Lacs was also made in the hands of the assessee. The action of Ld. AO, upon confirmation by Ld. CIT(A), is under challenge before us. We find that the discrepancies found during the course of survey proceedings remained to be explained by the assessee to the satisfaction of lower authorities. The unaccounted purchases/sales, shortage of stock and cash were noted during the course of survey. The onus to explain the discrepancies remained un-discharged. Therefore, the estimations as made by lower authorities, in our considered opinion, are quite fair and reasonable and no interference is called for. Resultantly, the appeal stand dismissed. 8. In the result, all the appeals st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|