9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , consider the claim of the assessee, accordingly. Thus, ground no.2 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ong with corroborative documentary evidences. In this respect, index of the paper book containing 233 pages furnished before the ld. CIT(A) under an acknowledged rubber stamp dated 06.04.2016 is extracted below, which is also placed in the paper book before us. Sr. No. PARTICULARS PAGE No. FROM PAGE No. ΤΟ 1 Computation Of Total Income, Profit and Loss A/C, Balance Sheet along with Audit Report 01 27 2 Comparative Statement for Gross Profit and Net Profit 28 28 3(i) List of Parties From Whom Purchases Disallowed 29 29 3(ii) List of Purchases Parties mentioned at point No- 3(i) with name and addresses thereof. 30 30 3(iii) Ledger Accounts Of Parties whose purchase disallowed reflecting payments in subsequent year towards purchases effected in A.y.2012-13 along with proof of payment obtained from Banker. 31 88 3(iv) Quantitative and Invoice wise details for purchases effected and corresponding sale for purchases alleged as Non-Genuine. 89 105 4 Quantitative Details of Stock inward and Stock Outward for Whole Year i.e.A.Y.2012-13 106 137 5 Documents i.e. Invoices(Purchase), Invoices(Sales), Reflecting Quantity and Particulars of Goods, alo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not furnished any new / additional evidence during the appellate proceedings, the documents furnished were already available in the file of the assessing officer while completing the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. In the rejoinder to the remand report, the appellant had stated that default of suppliers should not be harshly penalized to the extent of 100% since there was genuine export of goods. With regard to the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia), the appellant had submitted that Form 15 G/H have been submitted." 4. On the first issue relating to alleged bogus purchases, ld. CIT(A) held these entries as in the nature of arranged accommodation entries and agreed with the ld. AO on rejecting the books of accounts and bringing this amount to tax as unexplained purchases. He held so on account of non-filing of details asked for, non-production of purchasers, so as to conclusively prove the genuineness of the purchases made. In respect of the second issue relating to disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia), he sustained the same in absence of production of any documentary evidences. Thus, the appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein it was held as under: "8 In the present case, as noted above, the assessee was a trader of fabrics. The A.O. found three entities who were indulging in bogus billing activities. A.O. found that the purchases made by the assessee from these entities were bogus. This being a finding of fact, we have proceeded on such basis. Despite this, the question arises whether the Revenue is correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be added by way of assessee's additional income or the assessee is correct in contending that such logic cannot be applied. The finding of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal would suggest that the department had not disputed the assessee's sales. There was no discrepancy between the purchases shown by the assessee and the sales declared. That being the position, the Tribunal was correct in coming to the conclusion that the purchases cannot be rejected without disturbing the sales in case of a trader. The Tribunal, therefore, correctly restricted the additions limited to the extent of bringing the G.P. rate on purchases at the same rate of other genuine purchases." 6. In the present case, since assessee has placed on record all the corr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tely demonstrated with all the corroborative documentary evidences about the genuineness of purchase transaction against which export sales have been undertaken and sales consideration realised through proper banking channels. Merely because the suppliers did not appear before the ld. AO or Ld. CIT(A), it cannot be concluded that the purchases were not made by the assessee. 6.3. For this, we find force from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd. (supra). Further, Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Mohommad Haji Adam & Co.(supra), it is observed that purchases cannot be rejected without disturbing the sales in case of a trader. The addition in such cases can be restricted to the extent of bringing GP rate of purchases at the same rate of other genuine purchases. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (2019)110 taxmann.com 64(SC), has held that once assessee has submitted all the necessary details in terms of purchase bills, transportation bills, confirmed copy of accounts and payment are made through cheques, then such purchases cannot be disallowed. 6.3. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
