ITO WD 1(1), KALYAN V. ALPESH SURESH JAIN, BHIWANDI

ITA 1062/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9281 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAURABH DESH
• Assessee Lawyers: S M MAKHIJA
• Keywords: Bogus purchase

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1062/M/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), KALYAN VS. SHRI ALPESH SURESH JAIN, 431, CHAFA APARTMENT, KASAR ALI, AJAY NAGAR, BHIWANDI 421 302 PAN: AENPJ8257P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.M. MAKHIJA, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI SAURABH DESHPANDE, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 23.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.09.2017 O R D E R PER D.T. GARASIA , JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVEN UE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2016 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] R ELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF SCRAPS & JOB WORK ON P.L. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE AO) FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE BOGUS PURCHASES FR OM FOLLOWING PARTIES: ITA NO.1062/M/2017 SHRI ALPESH SURESH JAIN 2 SR. NO. NAME OF THE PARTY AMOUNT OF BILL A.Y. 10 - 11 A.Y. 11 - 12 1. SAMPARK STEELS RS.22,15,543/- - 2. PRAYAN TRADING CO. RS.15,93,329/- - 3. VITARAG TRADING CO. RS.21,90,165/- - 4. SAIRAM TRADING CORP. - RS.4,96,475/ - 5. LAXMI TRADING CO. - RS.9,66,147/- 6. MANIBHADRA METAL INDUSTRIES - RS.12,67,802/- 7. TOTAL RS.59,99,037/- RS.37,30,424/- 3. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE THE ABOVE PART IES FOR VERIFICATION. THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE OF NOTICE UND ER SECTION 133(6). THEREFORE, THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES. 4. MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE CLAIM BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 8.13 FROM THESE FACTS IT IS PROVED THAT THE APPELL ANT MIGHT HAVE AFFECTED THE PURCHASES FROM THE GREY MARKETS (WHICH ARE NOT OPEN FOR VERIFICATION) AND PROCURED THE BILL FROM ABOVE HAWALA PARTIES. T HEREFORE, RELYING ON THE RATIO LED DOWN BY HONBLE HAIPUR ITAT, THE DISALLOW ANCE @ 15% OF THE HAWALA PURCHASES, IN THIS CASE, WILL BE A LOGICAL C OURSE. ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE @ 15% OF HAWALA PURCHASES IS WORKED OU T AT RS.8,99,856/- (15% OF RS.59,99,037/-) FOR AYR 2010-11 & RS.5,59,5 64/- (15% OF RS.37,30,424/-) FOR AYR 2011-12. KEEPING IN VIEW T HE ABOVE FACTS, THE DISALLOWANCES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.8,99,856/- & RS.5 ,59,564/-, IN THESE YEARS, ARE SUSTAINED AND BALANCE AMOUNTS OF RS.50,99,180/- & RS.31,70,860/-, RESPECTIVELY, ARE DELETED. BOTH THE GROUNDS OF APP EAL ARE DISPOSED OFF ACCORDINGLY. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IN CONTROVERSY IS ALREADY COVER ED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE OWN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2011-12 IN ITA NO.1063/M/2017. APPLYING THE SAME RATIO FOLLOW ED IN THE ABOVE CITED CASE, WE FIND NO JUSTIFICATION TO INTER FERE WITH THE ORDER ITA NO.1062/M/2017 SHRI ALPESH SURESH JAIN 3 OF THE LD. CIT(A), AND ACCORDINGLY WE CONFIRM THE O RDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.09.2017. SD/- SD/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (D.T. GARASIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 20.09.2017. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.