9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the possibility of revenue leakage. After considering the decision of Tribunal in assessee s own case for earlier year and the GP and NP ratio declared by assessee for the year under consideration. We find that assessee has declared in AY 2009-10 the assessee has declared GP at 4.95 %, in AY 2010-11 at 17.55% and in AY 2011-12 at 5.38%. It is a settled law that principles of res judicata is not applicable in the income tax proceeding, similarly it is also settled legal view that consistency must be followed if there is no variation in the facts qua earlier or subsequent years. Therefore, in order to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage 6%, would meet the end of justice. Similar view was adopted by this combination, wherein the benefi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t sanction for reopening was not obtained from appropriate authority. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Ld.AO of disallowing 25% purchases. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 1,21,032/- made by Ld. AO on account of suspicious purchases. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 1,21,032/- made by Ld. AO without providing information on he has relied, opportunity of cross examination. Thus action of AO is against the principal of natural justice and makes order invalid. 2. Brief facts of the case are that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort of investigation wing of Mumbai. The assessee was asked to as to why the purchases shown from M/s Karnavat Impex Pvt. Be not treated as undisclosed income. The assessee filed its reply dated 05.12.2016. In reply, the assessee contended that show cause notice appears to have issued on the basis of internal report of higher officers. The entire contents of notice is based on hearsay only which is patently bad in law and illegal. The notice is silent about the evidence gathered. There is no evidence against the assessee. The assessee submits that they are unable to offer any comment in absence of evidence. On merit, to substantiate the purchases the assessee stated that purchases are fully supported by invoice, a xerox copy of invoices wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 143(1) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 15.08.2016. Aggrieved by the addition in the assessment order and against the re-opening the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Before Ld. CIT(A) the assessee field detailed written statement on the validity of reopening as well as on merit of the addition. The submission of assessee against the validity of re-opening is recorded in para-5 in the impugned order. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. in reopening. However on merit the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the additions on account of bogus purchases to the extent of 25% of the purchases shown from Karnavat Impex Ltd. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owance of entire purchases. The assessing officer not provided cross examination of the alleged hawala dealers. The disallowances upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) @ 25% of the impugned purchases, is on higher side and deserve to be deleted in total. The ld AR for the assessee submits that the assesse has shown very good gross profit (GP) in all years. In AY 2009-10 the assessee has declared GP at 4.95 %, in AY 2010-11 at 17.55% and in AY 2011-12 at 5.38%. The ld.AR of the assessee submits that entire purchases shown by assessee are genuine. In without prejudice and alternative submissions, the Ld. AR for the assessee submits that in alternative submission, the disallowance may be sustained on reasonable basis. To support his various submission, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies below. We have also deliberated on all the case laws relied by the ld AR for the assessee. We find that Assessing Officer while making addition on account of disallowance of 25% of purchases shown from Karnavat Impex Ltd.; solely relied upon the report of Investigation Wing without giving any finding on the documentary evidence furnished by assessee or making any independent investigation. The assessing officer has not disputed the sales of the assessee. No sale is possible without purchases. The statement of accounts of the assessee was not rejected by the assessing officer. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by AO. We are of the considered view, even if the parties are failed to prove the genuineness of entire transaction of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
