9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing above decisions, we confirm the addition @ 6% of bogus purchases. Hence, we dismiss the appeal of the Revenue. - Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member And Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Ketan Shah Shri Aman Shah, AR For the Respondent : Shri S. K. Keshkamat, CIT-DR ORDER PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the Revenue emanates from the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) dated 08.12.2023 by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short, Ld. CIT(A) ] National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as under: 1. On the On the facts and circumstances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta High Court of in the case of PCIT vs. Premlata Tekriwal (143 taxmann.com 173) involving similar issue of purchase of bogus concern to suppress profits wherein the court held that since it was established that expenditure was unexplained/bogus, entire amount of bogus expenditure was to be added to income of Assessee. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of bogus purchase even though in the case of Mayank Diamonds Pvt Ltd. [2014(ll) TMI 812], the Hon'ble High Court has directed to make addition at the rate of 5% of the total turnover. 6. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... solely with the purpose of facilitation of fraudulent financial transactions which includes providing accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loans, bogus sales/purchase bills etc. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee as to why the entire purchases should not be treated as bogus purchases and not added to the income of the assessee for the year under consideration. In response to the show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that the entire purchases were made through banking channel and details of tax invoice of purchase, copies of stock register and bank statements were furnished to claim that the transactions are genuine. The reply of the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has completed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to establish the genuineness of transaction. Moreover, just because the assessee had made payments through banking channels to the various parties and recorded the purchases in the books of account, it does not make the transactions genuine. There is every possibility for the assessee to make payment through banking channel and received same back by way of cash. He relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT-DR relied upon the various decisions viz: (i) M/s. Kachwala Gems vs. JCIT (ITA No.134/JP/2002), (ii) M/s. Kachwala Gems vs. JCIT, (2006) 206 CTR (SC) 585, 288 ITR 10 (SC), (iii) PCIT vs. Mrs Premlata Tekriwal, 143 taxamann.com 173 (Cal. HC). 6. On the other hand, Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. AR) of the assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
