9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idence and therefore the same is bad in law. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the learned Commissioner of income Tax (Appeal) erred in confirming certain purchases as in-genuine without appreciating that assessing officer has not brought out any material on record to substantiate that those entities were connected to so called Pravin Jain group or Gautam Jain group. 3. On the facts and the circumstance of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in confirming addition u/s.69C treating the certain purchases made as in-genuine without appreciating that the said purchases were duly recorded in the books of accounts and the payments were made through account payee cheques out of the funds generated from the regular business of the appellant and therefore there could be no addition u/s 69C which applies only when the source of the payment is not explained. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in sustaining disallowance of Rs.8,63,900/- being 5% of the Purchases from certain Parties purported to be part of Pravin Jain Group and Gautam Jain Group without appreciating that the said Purchases were fully evidenced by the Invoices, Challans, Sto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Casper Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 14,80,000/- 3. Duke Easiness Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 33,90,000/- 4. Khushi Gems Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 91,97,000/- 5. Nakshshatra Business P Ltd. Rs. 20,00,000/- Total Rs. 1,72,78,000/- 4. The assessee was asked to explain the genuineness of the purchases from all the aforesaid parties. The assessee in response to show cause notice, filed his reply dated 24/11/2016. In the reply, the assessee submitted that the assessee has purchased rough, cut and polished diamonds, the assessee has not taken accommodation entries. The assessee made regular business transaction. The assessee has sold the entire goods to various parties which is apparently evident in the stock register. The assessee furnished copy of bills and submitted that the payments were made through banking channel. The assessee denied of having any knowledge of the persons namely Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and submitted that he never met Shri Praveen Kumar Jain or Gautam Jain and he was not aware about the accommodation entries and modus operandi adopted by them in providing accommodation entries. Reply of assessee was not accepted by the Assessing officer. The Assessing officer held that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided to the assessee. The assessee furnished complete details to the Assessing Officer. 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee and the assessment order held that the he decided identical case in Gagnani Impex for A.Y. 2013-14 in Appeal No. CAS-3/512/2015-16 dated 24/11/2016, wherein he had after considering the decision of Tribunal in Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 137/Ahd/2009 dated 26/07/2011 restricted the disallowance of purchases to the extent of 5% of the total purchases. The ld. CIT(A) while restricting the addition of disallowance of bogus purchases also referred and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Satyanarayan P. Rathi (2013) 351 ITR 150, President Industries 258 ITR 654, Sumit P Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451, Bholanath Poly Fab (2013) 355 ITR 290, Mayank Diamonds in TA No. 200 of 2003 dated 07/11/2011 held that the disallowance of 100% purchases cannot be justified and only the profit element embedded in such purchases, to avoid the revenue leakage are reasonable to meet the end of justice. On the basis of various decisions, the ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to the extent of 5% of the purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 28/10/2015 (v) Pravin C. Bokadia Vs ITO-Circle 19(2)(5) ITA No. 3552/Mum/2019 dated 17/07/2020. 9. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR for the revenue has supported the order of the Assessing officer. The ld. Sr. DR submits that the Investigation Wing of Revenue made full-fledged investigation in the case of Praveen Kumar Jain and Gautam Jain. During the search action, various incriminating material was found. Statement of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and Gautam Jain were recorded. They categorically admitted for involvement in providing accommodation entry without actual delivery of goods. The assessee is one of the beneficiary who has obtained accommodation entry without actual delivery of goods. The assessee has not furnished proof of actual delivery of goods. The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to the extent of 5% of the purchases rather the entire purchases shown by the assessee are bogus. The ld. Sr. DR submits that the order of ld. CIT(A) may be reversed by restoring the order of Assessing Officer. 10. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties, perused the material available on record and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We have al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
