9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1822X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... executing civil contract work awarded mostly by MCGM. The CIT(A) has noted that without purchasing materials/goods it would not have been possible on the part of the assessee to execute the contract work with the MCGM. The assessee is executing work of a government authority. Therefore, there cannot be any manner of doubt with regard to the nature of work or the quantum of work carried out by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal of the department and cross-objection of the assessee are against the order dated 19.05.2015, of the learned CIT(A)-32, Mumbai, for A.Y. 2009-10. 2 . ITA No. 4549/Mum/2015 Assessment Year 2009-10 The grievance of the department in the present appeal is confined to the decision of the CIT(A) in restricting the addition made on account of alleged bogus purchases to 12.5% of such purchases. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from twenty three parties are bogus purchases, since such parties, as per the investigation carried out by the Sales Tax Department were found to be hawala dealers providing accommodation entries. Accordingly, the AO completed assessment by adding back the alleged bogus purchases of Rs.4,50,08,383/-. Assessee challenged the addition in appeal preferred before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. It is evident from record that the AO is not disputing the turnover of contract work executed by the assessee. Therefore, unless the assessee procured the materials/goods, though may not be from the declared sources but from some other sources, it would not have been possible on the part of the assessee to execute work awarded by MCGM. That being the case, the entire purchases made by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
