9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se in order to appreciate the controversy. ITA NO. 1328 & 1164/MUM/2015 (A.Y : 2009-10) :- 2. These are cross-appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue respectively against the order of CIT(A)-30, Mumbai dated 23.12.2014, which in turn has arisen from the order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 10.03.2014 under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 3. The Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and Revenue in their respective cross-appeals for the Assessment Year 2009-10 are as under :- ITA NO. 1328/MUM/2015 (Assessee's appeal) "I. Addition of Rs. 11,06,632/- (i.e. 12.5% of Rs. 88,53,059/-) on account of GP rate in respect of purchases 1. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rced and its subsequent movement during the year.?" 4. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in limiting the disallowance to the extent of 12.5% of the total alleged purchases without analyzing the input-output ratio for these purchases, particularly when these purchases were not traded but used in contract work for BMC.?" 5. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the profit element embedded and suppressed in the alleged purchase were to the extent of 12.5% relying on decision in the case of CIT vs.Simit P.Sheth (2013) 38 Taxmann 385(Guj) without appreciating that, unlike in the case of Simit Sheth (Supra), there was no finding in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssions and the relevant record perused. Quite clearly, the discussion in the assessment order reveals that the findings of Assessing Officer treating the purchases from 10 parties as bogus are based on a sound footing. The Assessing Officer has based his assessment on the information received from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra whereby the 10 parties from whom assessee had effected purchases of Rs. 88,53,059/- were found to be indulging in providing accommodation bills. In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer also conducted a verification exercise by issuing notices u/s 133(6) of the Act to the various parties and also deputed his Inspector. It is noted in the assessment order that the notices sen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il works of petty road repairs, building repairs, etc. In order to execute such contract, assessee purchased materials like cement, sand, metal mix, bricks, pipes, etc. from several suppliers including the 10 suppliers in question. It is pointed out that the contract has been executed and the contract receipts have also been offered to tax and the same has not been disputed by the Assessing Officer. In this background it was pointed out that assessee had indeed effected the purchases otherwise the corresponding contract receipts would not have arisen. 8. We find that the aforesaid submission has prevailed with the CIT(A) who followed the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Sim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
