M/S ROSHAN METAL INDUSTRIES, MUMBAI V. ITO 16(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1005/MUM/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6262 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SMITA VARMA LD
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3); 133(6); 13

Judgement Text

1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE HONBLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD , JM AND HONBLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING MODE) 1 . ./ I.T.A. NO. 1005 /MUM/20 20 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 10 ) M/S ROSHAN METAL INDUSTRIES 2 ND FLOOR, 2/4, PUSHPA SADAN 2 ND CARPENTER STREET , MUMBAI - 400 004 / VS. ITO - 16(3)(4 ) , MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 007 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO . A AJFR - 3446 - A ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VARMA LD. SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 02 /09 /2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02/09/2021 / O R D E R MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. AFORESAID APPEAL BY ASSESSEE FOR AY 20 09 - 10 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 7 MUMBAI [CIT(A)] DATED 23/12/2018 IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 ON 12/08/2014. THE SOLE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL IS ESTIMATION OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE . H OWEVER, THE MATERIAL ON RECORD WAS SUFFICIENT FOR DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL. THE LD. DR 2 PLEADED FOR DISMISSAL OF APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE BEING RESIDENT FIRM IS STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN TRADING OF METALS. 3. THE C ASE WAS REOPENED PURSUANT TO RECEIPT OF CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM SALES TAX DEPARTMENT, MAHARASHTRA ON THE BASIS OF WHICH IT WAS ALLEGED THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE SUSPICIOUS PURCHASES OF RS.58.29 LACS FROM 13 ENTITIES AS DETAILED IN PARA 5.1 OF THE ORDER. NOTI CES ISSUED U/S 133(6) TO THESE SUPPLIERS DID NOT ELICIT ANY SATISFACTORY RESPONSE. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED COPIES OF PURCHASE INVOICES, BANK STATEMENTS EVIDENCING PAYMENT THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS, STOCK REGISTER, QUANTITATIVE DETAILS ETC. HOWEVER, NOT CONVI NCED, RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CIT V/S SIMIT P. SHETH (356 ITR 451), LD. AO ESTIMATED ADDITION OF 12.5% AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A). AFTER GOING THROUGH FINDINGS OF LD. AO IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, LD. CIT(A) CONCURRED THAT THE ESTIMATION WAS QUITE FAIR AND REASONABLE. STILL AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTH ORITIES, WE FIND THAT LD. AO HAS PASSES WELL REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER IN THE LIGHT OF ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY NEW MATERIAL BEFORE US, WE SEE NO REASON TO DEVIATE FROM THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL. 6. THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 02 ND SEPTEMBER, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - ( C. N. PRASAD ) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 3 MUMBAI; DATED : 02/09/2021 SR.PS, DHANANJAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMB AI.