M/s. Leesa Steels, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Pune

ITA 1227/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7321 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: THIS CONSOLIDATED
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Accommodation entries

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / ITA NOS.1226 TO 1228/PUN/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 TO 2011-12 M/S. LEESA STEELS, 102, MOHITE PATIL PARADISE, MANIK BAUG, PUNE 411 051 PAN : AAAFL5254H VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER BENCH : THESE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATE TO ASSE SSMENT YEARS 2009-10 TO 2011-12. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE RAISE D IN THESE APPEALS, WE ARE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE THEM OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THESE APPEALS WERE FIRST TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 21- 08-2019, THAT IS, MUCH PRIOR TO THE LOCKDOWN. SINCE NONE APPEARED O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEALS WERE ADJOURNED FOR 1 4-10-2019. ON THAT DATE ALSO, THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE O F THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED SEVERAL TIM ES, BUT THE APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY MS. USHA GAIKWAD DATE OF HEARING 03-09-2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03-09-2020 ITA NOS.1226 TO 1228/PUN/2017 M/S. LEESA STEELS 2 ASSESSEE CONTINUED TO REMAIN ABSENT. FINALLY, THE CASE WAS F IXED FOR TODAY. AGAIN, NEITHER THERE IS ANY ONE PRESENT TO REPRE SENT TO ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED. I N THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE LEFT WITH NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO DISPOSE O FF THE APPEALS EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMED OF ADDITIONS BY THE CIT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF HAWALA PURCHASES. 4. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE FOR ALL THE YEARS U NDER CONSIDERATION ARE THAT SOME INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE AO FROM THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT OF MAHARASHTRA GOVERNMEN T REGARDING BENEFICIARIES OF HAWALA TRANSACTIONS DETECTED BY IT. ONE OF THE BENEFICIARIES IN A SUCH LIST, WAS THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) INITIATED RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THES E YHEARS AND MADE ADDITION AT 100% OF THE AMOUNT OF BILLS OF HAWALA PURCHASES. THE LD. CIT(A) COUNTENANCED THE VIEW POINT OF THE AO ON THIS ISSUE, AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP IN AP PEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT CAS ES OF SEVERAL ASSESSEES WHO HAD OBTAINED BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS FROM ITA NOS.1226 TO 1228/PUN/2017 M/S. LEESA STEELS 3 HAWALA PARTIES, CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE PUNE B ENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL. VIDE ONE SUCH ORDER DATED 26.9.2019 IN DINESH RATHI VS. DCIT (ITA NO. 975/PUN/2018) AND OTHERS, THE TRIB UNAL HAS RESTORED THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO BY OBSERVING IN PARA NO. 11 AS UNDER : - `NOW WE TURN TO THE MERITS OF THE CASES. THE ASSAIL IS TO THE MAKING OF ADDITION(S) ON THE BASIS OF BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE(S) AS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES FROM HAWALA DEALERS. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ISSUE OF BOGUS PURCHAS ES HAS RECENTLY COME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN PR.CIT VS. MOHOMMAD HAJI ADAM & CO. VIDE ITS JUDGMENT DATED 11-02-2019 IN ITA NO.1004 OF 2016 AND OTHERS, THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT NO AD HOC ADDITION FOR BOGUS PURCHASES SHOULD BE MADE. IT LAID DOWN THAT THE ADDITION SHOULD BE MADE TO THE EXTENT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE GROSS PROFIT RATE ON GENUIN E PURCHASES AND GROSS PROFIT RATE ON HAWALA PURCHASES. S UCH CASE SPECIFIC DETAILS ARE NOT READILY AVAILABLE WITH THE RESPECTIVE LD. ARS OR THE LD. DRS FOR FACILITATING THE CALCULATION OF GROSS PROFIT RATES OF GENUINE AND HAWALA PURCHASES. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE RESPECTIVE AOS FOR APPLYING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE ABOVE NOTED CASE AND RECOMPUTE THE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONS, IF ANY, AFTER ALLOWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NOS.1226 TO 1228/PUN/2017 M/S. LEESA STEELS 4 6. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INSTANT APPEALS ARE SIMILAR AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. DR. WE, THEREFORE, SET-SIDE THE I MPUGNED ORDERS AND REMIT THE MATTER TO FILE OF AO FOR DECIDING THIS ISS UE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE OBSERVATIONS MADE ABOVE. NEEDLE SS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE WILL BE ALLOWED ADEQUATE HEARING OPPORTUNITY . 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03 RD SEPTEMBER, 2020. SD/- SD/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VI CE PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 03 RD SEPTEMBER, 2020 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. THE CIT(A)-2, PUNE 4. 5. 6. THE PR.CIT-2, PUNE , , / DR A, ITAT, PUNE; / GUARD FILE. / TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE ITA NOS.1226 TO 1228/PUN/2017 M/S. LEESA STEELS 5 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 03-09-2020 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 03-09-2020 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *