A.C.I.T.-1, Agra V. Sh. Shanti Swaroop Jain, Agra

ITA 190/AGR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 19020314 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRI
• Keywords: Bogus purchase

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 190/AGRA/2013 ASSTT. YEAR : 2009-10 A.C.I.T. 1, AGRA. VS. SH. SHANTI SWAROOP JAIN , PROP. M/S. JAIN INTERNATIONAL, 6/23, HING KI MANDI, AGRA. (PAN: AAXPJ 6082 C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.K. MISHRA, JR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PANKAJ GARGH, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 08.08.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 14.08.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-I, AGRA DATED 31.01.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT THE CIT(A)-1, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.61,80,049/- IN RESPECT OF BOGUS PURCHASE FROM M/S. GOPAL ENTERPRISES TO INFLATE HIS PURCHASE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND O N FACTS TO GRANT RELIEF ON ACCOUNT OF GP WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND STATEMENT OF SHRI RAM GOPAL SHARMA. 3. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,49,000/- IN RESPECT O F INTEREST PAID TO ITA NO. 190/AGRA/2013 2 SMT. RENU JAIN, WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE F ACTS OF THE CASE AND CASE LAW. 2. ON GROUND NO. 1 & 2, THE AO DIRECTED THE ASSESSE E TO PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, BILLS AND VOUCHERS, WHICH WERE EXAMINED ON TEST CHECK BASIS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE RAM GOPAL SHARMA WITH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED GOODS WORTH RS.61,80,949/- DURING THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. SHRI RAM GOPAL SHARMA, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. GOPAL ENT ERPRISES APPEARED AND STATEMENT WAS RECORDED WHICH IS ALSO REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE AO CONSIDERING THE STATEMENT FOUND THAT HE WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND ALSO FOUND THAT THE FACTS ARE SAME AS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT OUT IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AND CONSIDERING T HE SAME, BOOK RESULTS WERE REJECTED AND IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BOOK ED BOGUS PURCHASES AMOUNTING TO RS.61,80,949/- FROM M/S. GOPAL ENTERPRISES TO INFLA TE THE PURCHASES. SAME WERE, THEREFORE, DISALLOWED. SIMILARLY ON GROUND NO. 3, I T WAS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE BUSINESS PURPOSE FOR WHICH INT EREST WAS PAID TO SMT. RENU JAIN. IT WAS ALSO FOUND THAT INTEREST PAID TO SMT. RENU JAIN HAS ALSO BEEN DISALLOWED DURING THE PRECEDING YEAR 2008-09, THEREFORE, RS.2, 49,000/- WAS DISALLOWED. BOTH THE ADDITIONS WERE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IS INCORPORATED IN THE A PPELLATE ORDER. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN THE IMMEDIATE PRECEDING ASSESSMEN T YEAR, SIMILAR ADDITIONS HAVE ITA NO. 190/AGRA/2013 3 BEEN MADE BY THE AO WHICH HAVE BEEN DELETED BY THE ITAT, AGRA BENCH IN THE CASE OF SAME ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 29.01.2013. THE LD. CIT(A) REPRODUCED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09 DATED 29.01.2013 IN THE APPELLATE ORDER AND FOLLOWING THE SAME DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.61,80,949/- AS WELL AS RS.2,49,000/- ON ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET S UBMITTED THAT BOTH THE ISSUES ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF ITAT, AGRA BENCH IN THE CASE OF SAME ASSESSEE FOR PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 -09 IN ITA NO. 179/AGRA/2012 VIDE ORDER DATED 29.01.2013 AND BOTH THE SIMILAR ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DELETED. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL IS REPRODUCED IN THE APPELLATE ORDER. COPY OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IS P LACED ON RECORD AND PROVIDED TO THE LD. DR. THE LD. DR DID NOT DISPUTE THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT ON BOTH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. THE AO MADE THE ADDITION BY FOLLOWING THE FINDING OF FACT BROUGHT OUT ON RECORD IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL OF PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 DELETED BOTH THE ADDITIONS. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT BOTH THE ADDITIONS NOW CHALLENGED BEFORE US ARE IDENTICA L WHICH HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED IN ITA NO. 190/AGRA/2013 4 DETAIL IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THEREF ORE, THE FACTS BEING SAME, WE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN TH E CASE OF ASSESSEE FOR PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR AND DISMISS THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL . 5. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY