VIKAS KUMAR JAIN, MUMBAI V. ITO 19(3)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 1588/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9416 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM TIWARI
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) I.T.A. NO. 1588 /MUM/ 2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09 - 1 0 ) SHRI VIKAS KUMAR JAIN PROP. M/S. RAJGURU INFOTECH 10/B, 2 ND FLOOR NANUMAN TERRACE, TARA TEMPLE LANE, LAMINGTON ROA D MUMBAI - 400 007. PAN : ABNPJ9812B VS. ITO 19(3)(5) ROOM NO. 201 MATRU MANDIR TRADEO ROAD MUMBAI - 400007. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI RAM TIWARI DATE OF HEARING 1 8 .9. 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 . 9 . 201 7 O R D E R THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - 30, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2009 - 10. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN PARTIALLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION RELATING TO BOGUS PURCHASE S MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE , EVEN THOUGH NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SE N T TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION. HENCE, I PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE AP PEAL EX - PARTE, WITHOUT PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE A SSESSEE HEREIN IS THE PROPRIETOR OF A CONCERN NAMED M/S. RAJGURU INFOTECH, WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN COMPUTER PERIPHERALS. CONSEQUENT TO THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT THAT CERTAIN PARTIES ARE INDULGING IN PROVIDING ONLY ACCOMMODATION BILLS WITHOUT ACTUALLY SUPPLYING THE MATERIAL AND UPON NOTICING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED GOODS TO THE TUNE OF ` 288.95 LAKHS FROM SUCH DEALERS DURING THE YEAR UNDER CO NSIDERATION , THE ASSESSING OFFICER REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT OF SHRI VIKAS KUMAR JAIN 2 THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED ASSESSMENT BY ADDING 12.5% OF THE ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES, WHICH WORKED OUT TO ` 36.11 LAKHS. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE RATIO OF DECISION RENDERED BY HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SIMITH P. SHETH (356 ITR 451) AND SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION SHOULD BE AROUND 6% ONLY. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY, RESTRICTED TH E ADDITION TO 6.5% OF THE VALUE OF NON - GENUINE PURCHASE. STILL AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. I HEARD LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORD. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS AGREED FOR ADDITION @ 6% OF THE VALUE OF BOGUS PURCHASES AND SINCE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS SUSTAINED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 6.5% ONLY , I DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE . 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 8 . 9 . 201 7. SD/ - (B.R.BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 1 8 / 9 / 20 1 7 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) PS ITAT, MUMBAI