9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is also not allowable. The margin paid by the assessee of ₹1.15 crores could not have been deposited by the assessee. Similar is the case with respect to unsecured creditors appearing in the books of assessee cannot be accepted as genuine as sales and purchases both are not genuine. It is a clear-cut case that somebody else is operating on behalf of the assessee by using his bank account and of course, assessee cannot also be stated to be ignorant of the situation. Therefore, the assessee as well as the person who are trading with the assessee such as M/s. Riddhi Siddhi Bullion Ltd. is entering into purchase and sales of gold and silver with some ulterior motive. We set aside the whole appeal filed by the learned Assessing Officer as well as the assessee back to the file of AO to re-investigate the whole aspect of the huge transactions of purchases and sales of Gold and silver and to find out who are the real beneficiaries of these transactions. Prime facie it seems that Riddhi Sidhi Bullion and Hundia Exports have booked huge bogus sales in the name of this assessee. The proper examination of operation of bank account of the assessee by finding out who opened ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377;60,960/- 22-07-2003 3. 2004-05 ₹64,980/- 30-09-2004 4. 2005-06 ₹Nil (below taxable limit return not filed) 5. 2006-07 (-) ₹2,35,547/- 30-10-2006 (loss return) 4. The ld. CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the Appellant belongs to a lower-middle class family and his total income for the later four years is as under:- Sr. No. Assessment Year. Total Income Date of filing of Return 1. 2009-10 ₹ Nil --- (below taxable limit return not filed) 2. 2010-11 ₹ Nil (below taxable limit return not filed) 3. 2011-12 ₹ Nil --- (below taxable limit return not filed) 4. 2012-13 ₹1,79,260/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO and recording his finding and satisfaction on the matter . 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of MCX trading loss of Rs. 1,34,28,014/, without appreciating the fact that the remand proceedings and the appellate proceedings have been conducted in the manner which is akin to almost setting aside the assessment . 04. Brief facts of the case shows that assessee is an individual stated to be dealing in gold and silver and at commodities exchange. He filed his return of income for A.Y. 2007-08 on 31st October, 2007, declaring nil income. 05. The case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny under the compulsory ground that assessee s turnover is more than 20 crores. Several notices were issued to the assessee but no compliances were made. 06. Ultimately, the counsel of the assessee attended on 17th December, 2009 and submitted statement of total income, profit and loss account, balance sheet under the covering letter. The current address of the assessee was also stated to be at D-9, Heena Garden Complex, Pipeline Road, Khadakpada, Kalyan. It was also stated that assessee has discontinued his busines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further noted that assessee has made total gross profit of ₹42 lacs in cash transaction contrary to the observation of the learned Assessing Officer that no margin of profit was shown by the assessee. He further held that assessee has given the names of the customers and such sales were made out of the purchases from the above two parties. He further held that assessee has never done any business in the past and therefore, the source of the above sales as undisclosed income is not acceptable. Accordingly, he deleted the addition of ₹658 crores made by the learned Assessing Officer by bringing the entire sales to tax as undisclosed income. b. With respect to the trading loss of ₹1,34,28,014/- based on the verification of the contract notes and the copies of the ledger account of the assessee with MCX and NCDEX. c. With respect to the unsecured loan of ₹43,49,79,005/-, the learned CIT (A) after taking the remand report, he held that assessee has failed to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and the genuineness of the transaction and therefore, same is confirmed. However, he deleted the addition to the extent of ₹6,87,89,490 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 2. All along, I made myself clear to M/s. Riddhi Siddhi Bullion Ltd and Shri. Dinesh Jani that I belong to a poor family and my monthly income is approximately Rs.25,000/- which is hardly sufficient to look after both the educational expenses of my child as well as maintenance of my family. Practically, there are no savings during the last fifteen years. 3. Shri. Dinesh Jani sometimes in the year 2005 motivated me to do some illegal business transactions of the following parties. In friendship, I listened to him and signed wherever Shri. Jani asked to me to sign the papers. I have no capacity to do such big transactions running into crores of rupees. I am very very poor person, how I can do transitions of such big amounts? You may please enquire about my financial position both with Shri. Bhawarlalji Kothari and Shri. Jani who motivated me to do such illegal business transactions and, as a result of which, I have filed false returns due to these persons i.e. Shri. Bhawarlalji Kothari and Shri. Dinesh Jani. Actually, I have not done any business transactions of purchase and supply of diamonds with the following parties:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income. The learned Authorized Representative further referred to the paper book submitted on behalf of assessee. 014. Therefore, in the nutshell, the submission of the assessee is that he has not done any transaction but it is Mr. Dinesh Jani and Mr. Shri. Bhawarlalji Kothari, who motivated him to do the bogus business. In nutshell, the statement of the assessee also says that purchases showed by him from M/s. Riddhi Siddhi Bullion Ltd. are bogus. 015. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of the learned Assessing Officer. It was submitted that the addition of sale consideration was wrongly deleted by the learned CIT (A) when assessee himself at present is saying that purchases made from M/s. Riddhi Siddhi Bullion Ltd. is bogus. He therefore submitted that the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer deserves to be confirmed. 016. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. In the present case, the assessee himself on an affidavit stated that he is a person of no means and did not carry on of such huge business. He on an affidavit has stated that his purchases from M/s. Riddhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
