9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 924X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer to estimate the profit element from the non- genuine purchases at 4% for the Assessment Year under consideration Non maintainability of appeal as filled manually - Mandation of appeal filled electronically - HELD THAT:- An identical issue had come up before the Coordinate Bench in the case of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners v. ITO[ 2018 (6) TMI 1171 - ITAT MUMBAI] and the Tribunal held that non-filing of appeal in the electronic form is only a procedural defect which can be cured and the Tribunal restored the appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for disposal on merits and the assessee was directed to file appeal in electronic form within ten days on receipt of order. Similar view has been taken by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t complying with principles of natural justice. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts confirming the disallowance of alleged bogus purchases of ₹ 3,88,719/- being 12.5% of ₹ 31,09,750/-in the hands of the appellant. 4. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend and/or delete in all the foregoing grounds of appeal. 3. Briefly stated the facts are that, assessee an individual engaged in the business of ferrous and non-ferrous metals filed return of income on 14.09.2009 declaring income of ₹ 1,36,338/- for the A.Y. 2009-10 and the return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, Assessing Officer received information from the DGIT(Inv.,), Mumbai about the accommodation entries provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... produce the parties and as such the Books of Accounts remained unverifiable. Therefore, Assessing Officer treated purchases of ₹ 13,12,474/-from Anand Deep Metal and ₹ 1797276/- from Navratan Impex totaling to ₹ 31,09,750/- as non-genuine. However, following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451] Assessing Officer estimated the profit element from such purchases at 12.5% and disallowed ₹ 3,88,719/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the action of the Assessing Officer in estimating the Gross Profit at 12.5% for the A.Y:2009-10. Against this order of the Ld.CIT(A) assessee is in appeal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xman.com 385]. Simply because the parties were not produced the entire purchases cannot be added as held by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Nikunj Eximp [216 Taxman.com 171]. I agree with the view of the lower authorities that there should be an estimation of profit element from these purchases and should be estimated reasonably as the assessee could not conclusively prove that the purchases made are from the parties as claimed, especially in the absence of any confirmations from them. Taking the totality of facts and circumstances, keeping in view the nature of business of the assessee i.e. trader in Ferrous and non-Ferrous Metals, it would be justified if the profit element embedded in those purchases are estimated at 4%. Acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the appeal was dismissed as non-est. It is noticed that an identical issue had come up before the Coordinate Bench in the case of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners v. ITO in ITA.No. 7134/MUM/2017 [64 ITR (Trib.) 0704] and the Tribunal held that non-filing of appeal in the electronic form is only a procedural defect which can be cured and the Tribunal restored the appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for disposal on merits and the assessee was directed to file appeal in electronic form within ten days on receipt of order. Similar view has been taken by the Coordinate Bench in the various decisions. Following the above decisions, this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) and assessee is directed to e-file the afores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
