GOPAL & SONS HUF,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD 32(1), , KOLKATA

ITA 672/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Gopal & Sons HUF against the order of the CIT(A)-09, Kolkata, which confirmed the AO's addition regarding the purchase of diamonds worth Rs.5,12,100 from Moulimani Impex Pvt. Ltd., Surat, during the assessment year 2008-2009. The AO had treated this purchase as a bogus transaction. The assessee, represented by Shri Miraj D. Shah, argued that the diamonds were for personal use and not for resale, and thus the expenditure should not be considered bogus. The revenue, represented by Smt. Pampa Ray, contended that the diamonds were purchased from a bogus company. The tribunal, after considering the submissions and evidence, including the bank statement showing the transaction, ruled in favor of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708864 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAMPA RAY
• Assessee Lawyers: MIRAZ D. SHAH
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Bogus

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.672/KOL/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Gopal & Sons HUF Block A, Poddar Point, 1st Floor, 113 Park Street Poddar Point, Kolkata Vs ITO, Ward-32(1), Kolkata PAN No. : AABHG 9506 N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Miraz D. Shah, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt. Pampa Ray, JCIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-09, Kolkata, dated 27.03.2019 for the Assessment Year 2008-2009. 2. Shri Miraj D. Shah, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Pampa Ray, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. It was the submission by the ld. AR that the assessee had purchased diamonds for a value of Rs.5,12,100/- during the impugned assessment year from Moulimani Impex Pvt. Ltd., Surat. The assessee had paid for the same by cheque. Ld.AR has also placed before me the bank statement of the assessee wherein the details of the transaction and cheque number are available. It was submitted that the AO treated this amount of purchase price of Rs.5,12,100/- as the bogus purchase of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has purchased the diamonds for personal use. The assessee is not a dealer of diamonds. The assessee has not sold the diamonds and the assessee has not claimed the said expenditure on ITA No.672/KOL/2025 2 the purchase of diamond as expenditure. It was the prayer that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. It was also the submission of the ld. AR that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order, insofar as the assessee had no knowledge of the hearing having been posted. It was the submission that even the order of the ld. CIT(A) was also not known to the assessee, it came to the knowledge only after getting the certified copy of the same in March, 2025, then the assessee proceeded to file the present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that the diamonds were purchased from a bogus company in Surat. It was the submission that the order of the ld.AO and ld.CIT(A) are liable to be upheld. 5. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the assessee is not a dealer of diamonds. The diamonds purchased are not stock-in-trade. The expenditure on account of purchase of diamonds have not been claimed by the assessee as an expenditure. This being so, there is no cause for treating the expenditure by the AO as bogus. In these circumstances, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 15/07/2025. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 15/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. ITA No.672/KOL/2025 3 आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : sआदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// "