9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee as the purchases in the three assessment years are under the shadow of doubt. As decided in M/s. Chhabi Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [ 2017 (6) TMI 514 - ITAT PUNE] estimated addition @ 10% of the alleged hawala purchases. In the aforesaid bunch of appeals the additions were made on the basis of information received from Sales Tax Department. The purchases made by assessee from hawala dealers were held to be bogus and Assessing Officer made addition of the entire such purchases. In first appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) granted partial relief to the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter in second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal categorized the appeals on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer and failed to furnish the requisite details and information, therefore, the Assessing Officer was constrained to invoke the provisions of section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). During the period relevant to assessment years under appeal the assessee had purchased steel from various parties including the parties which have been notified as hawala dealers. The purchases made by assessee from such dubious dealers is as under : Assessment Year 2009-10 Sr. No. Name of the Firm Amount 1 K R C Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. ₹ 4,50,050/- 2 Rashmi Enterprises ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment orders passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, the assessee filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) rejected the contentions of assessee and dismissed the appeals for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. Now, the assessee is in second appeal before the Tribunal assailing the findings of First Appellate Authority. 3. Shri S.D. Pathak appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer made addition of the entire purchases made by assessee from the alleged hawala dealers. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has confirmed the findings of Assessing Officer in toto. Even if it is presumed that the assessee has made purchases ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord by the AO that money has been exchanged in the hands in lieu of payment made for these purchases by account payee cheque; and v) the AO had neither provided copy of materials and statements relied upon by him nor allowed any opportunity to the Appellant to cross examine those parties who have been alleged to have provided the accommodation entries of such purchases. c) In reaching to the conclusion and confirming such addition made by the AO, the Id. CIT(A) omitted to consider relevant factors, considerations, principles and evidences while he was overwhelmed, influenced and prejudiced by irrelevant considerations and factors. d) Without prejudice, the rate or percentage of profit element embedded in such purchases as fixed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. On the other hand Shri Ajay Modi representing the Department vehemently defended the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The ld. DR submitted that the assessee was non-cooperative before the Assessing Officer. No details of purchases made, details of transportation, delivery challan, weightment slips, octroi receipts and goods receipt note showing movement of the goods were produced by assessee either before the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Ample opportunity was granted by Assessing Officer to furnish stock register and confirmations from the parties. The same were also not filed by the assessee. In the absence of any information the authorities below have rightly made addition of the ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e bogus and Assessing Officer made addition of the entire such purchases. In first appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) granted partial relief to the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter in second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal categorized the appeals on the basis of facts and thereafter estimated the addition @ 10%. 7. Taking into consideration entirety of facts and the decision of Tribunal in the case of M/s. Chhabi Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (supra), we are of considered view that addition on account of bogus purchases if estimated @ 10% of such purchases, would meet the ends of justice. We hold and direct accordingly. Thus, all the three appeals of the assessee a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
