9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d meet the possibility of revenue leakage - no infirmity in the addition of 12.5% of disputed purchases as sustained by the learned CIT(A). We find that the same is also in line with the judgment of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in PCIT vs Paramshakti Distributors Ltd. [ 2019 (7) TMI 838 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Appeal by the Revenue is dismissed. - ITA no. 3238/Mum./2019 - - - Dated:- 13-4-2023 - SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash Singh ORDER PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL , J. M. The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the impugned order dated 15/03/2019, passed under sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct that parties from whom these purchases were made proven accommodation entry providers, as concluded by Sales Tax Authorities pursuant to the investigation carried out by them ? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the latest Apex Court decision in the case of N.K.Proteins Ltd Vs DCIT (769 OF 2017), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has confirmed 100% addition made on account of bogus purchases? (3) The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT (A) on the above grounds be reversed and that of the Assessing officer be restored. (4) The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may be necessary. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act were issued to these parties at the address available on record and to submit documentary evidence in respect of transactions entered with the assessee. However, notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act were returned by the postal authorities with the remark 'not known/left except one of the parties, wherein the party denied having any transaction with the assessee. Accordingly, a questionnaire along with a show cause notice was issued to the assessee for furnishing the details along with substantiating evidence. In response thereto, the assessee furnished copies of bills, Ledger accounts, delivery challan, transportation details, stock register, and bank statements showing payments made to these parties through banking chann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l is against the order treating purchases to the tune of Rs. 22,20,991/- as bogus and adding 25% of the same. As per the investigations carried out by the Sales Tax Authorities, the these parties were found to be involved in giving accommodation entries only without actually supplying the goods. The logical inference is that the purchases made by the appellant would also be in the nature of accommodation entries only. To verify the same, the AO had made enquiries by issuing notices u/s 133(6) which were returned unserved by the postal authorities. This party was found to be non existent at the address given by the appellant. However, the appellant could not produce the party before the AO inspite of apportunity being given. The onus of prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this case has held that profit margin of 12.5% of the bogus purchases will be reasonable. Respectfully following the Order in the case of Simit P. Sheth the addition is restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchases of Rs. 22,20,991/-. This ground of appeal is 'Partly Allowed. Being aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the present case, on the basis of the information received from the Sales Tax Department that the assessee is the beneficiary of bogus purchases, reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee were initiated. Further, notices issued under section 133(6) by the AO to these entities were also returned unserved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
