9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 849X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the overall purchases, had estimated the profit percentage to 2% of value of disputed purchases. AR before us also placed on record the statement showing gross profit earned by the assessee in percentage terms both on disputed purchases and overall purchases for the A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11. As the factual matrix is exactly identical with the facts prevailing in the case of Shri Prateek Gupta we direct the ld. AO to estimate the profit percentage at 2% of value of disputed purchases. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as by the Revenue are disposed of in the above mentioned manner. - ITA No.3813/Mum/2018 & 3814/Mum/2018 ITA No.3798/Mum/2018 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2023 - SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI M.B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Both the parties mutually agreed that the facts of A.Y.2009-10 be taken up for adjudication and the decision rendered thereon, shall apply with equal force for A.Y.2010-11 also except with variance in figures. 3.2. We find that assessee is a proprietor of M/s. G.G. Corporation which is related concern of Ushdev group and is engaged in the business of trading in ferrous and non-ferrous metals. A search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act was carried out on Ushdev group on 11/09/2014. During the course of search proceedings, evidences found thereon proved that assessee and its various group concerns had taken certain accommodation entries from various conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly profit element embedded in the value of such purchases could be brought to tax. This profit element was estimated by the ld. CIT(A) at 12.5%. Aggrieved, both assessee as well as the Revenue are in appeal before us for A.Y.2009-10 and only assessee is in appeal before us for A.Y.2010-11. 3.5. At the outset, there is no dispute that assessee had made purchases from certain tainted parties. The main contention of the assessee as well as the ld. CIT(A) is that since the corresponding sales made out of the said disputed purchases were not doubted by the Ld. AO, the only profit element embedded in the value of such disputed purchases could be brought to tax. Now the dispute before us is determination of such profit element. The ld. CIT(A) h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
