9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... worked out to be 8.12%. The same has not been disputed by the assessee either before the First Appellate Authority or the Tribunal. To meet ends of justice it would be fair to restrict disallowance on unproved purchases to 10%. Appeal by the assessee is partly allowed. - ITA Nos. 273 and 274/MUM/2020 - - - Dated:- 22-6-2021 - Vikas Awasthy, Member (J) For the Appellant : B.P. Purohit For the Respondents : Sanjay J. Sethi ORDER These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Mumbai [in short 'the CIT(A)'] for the assessment year 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively. Both the impugned orders are of even date i.e. 15/11/2019. Since, the facts germane to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee has declared G.P of 6.68% in assessment year 2010-11, without prejudice to first contention, if at all addition has to be made it should be restricted to the G.P declared by assessee. 3. On the other hand, Shri Sanjay J. Sethi representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. The ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee failed to discharge its onus in proving genuineness of purchases and the dealers. The assessee failed to produce the dealers from whom suspicious purchases were made. Some of the dealers from whom assessee has obtained bills have admitted that bills were issued against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Bombay High Court.]. The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the G.P declared by the assessee in assessment year 2010-11 is 6.68%. However, on perusal of assessment order it is observed that the G.P has been worked out to be 8.12%. The same has not been disputed by the assessee either before the First Appellate Authority or the Tribunal. Taking into consideration entirety of facts, I am of considered view that to meet ends of justice it would be fair to restrict disallowance on unproved purchases to 10%. The ground No. 1 of the appeal is thus, partly allowed in the aforesaid terms. 5. In ground No. 2 of the appeal the assessee has assailed validity of assessment. Since no arguments were advanced on this groun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
