ASST CIT CIR 2, KALYAN V. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI, ULHASNAGAR

ITA 191/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8518 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POOJA SWAROOP
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 69C; 40A(3); 143(3); 147; 131; 148; 144

Judgement Text

ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN ,AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM ./ I.T.A. NO 191/MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 10 ASST. CIT, CIRCLE 2 2 ND FLOOR, MOHAN PLAZA, KHADAKPADA, WAYALE NAGAR KALYAN (W) / VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI PROP. M.S PURE LUBES; HAPPY HOME, PLOT NO. 611 TO 617 ULHASNAGAR. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. ACXPN4766H ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. K. GOPAL / REVENUE BY : MS. POOJA SWAROOP, D.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 01.11.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 . 1 1 .2017 / O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 3, MUMBAI, WHICH IN ITSELF ARISES FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O UNDER SEC. 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT ACT) , DATED. 11.07.2014. THE REVENUE HA S ASSAILED BEFORE US THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 2 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, THAN ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF R S . 2,75,28,640/ - OUT OF THE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS. 5,37,86,630/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES, DESPITE HOLDING THAT THE PURCHASES WERE NOT GENUINE AND THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LD. CIT(A) - 3. THANE ERRED IN DELETING THE ABOVE ADDITION DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE HIS ONUS OF PROVING THE PURCHASES. 3. THE APPELLANT PR AYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, THANE, MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER OR ALTER ANY GROUND/GROUNDS, WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN L.D.O AND FURNACE OIL HAD FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2009 - 10 ON 30.09.2009, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,37,57,990/ - . THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED AS SUCH U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. 3. THAT FROM THE INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE A.O FROM THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT , MAHARASHTRA, IT WAS GATHERED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS OF RS. 42,42,97,70 5/ - FROM CERTAIN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDERS IN THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2009 - 10 TO A.Y. 2011 - 12. THE DETAILS OF THE BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS AS UNDER: S. NO. NAME OF THE ENTRY PROVIDER BILL AMOUNT 1. KOTSONS IMPEX PVT. LTD. RS. 4,00,28,638/ - THAT ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID INFORMATION A SURVEY ACTION WAS CONDUCTED BY THE ADIT(INV.), KALYAN AT THE OFFICE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE , VIZ. M/S PURE LUBES AT KALYAN - AMERNATH ROAD, OPP. STATE BANK OF INDIA, ULHASNAGAR . THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY PROCEEDINGS ADMITTED THAT NO GENUINE PURCHASES OF THE GOODS ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 3 UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS MADE BY HIM FROM THE HAWALA DEALERS . THE A.O ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID FACTS REOPENED THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE AND ISSUED A NOTICE UNDER SEC. 148. THE ASSESSEE IN COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SEC. 148 FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF R S . 2,62,57,988/ - . TH AT AS THE ASSESSEE DESPITE HAVING BEEN AFFORDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES F AILED TO ATTEND THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THEREFORE, THE A.O RESORTED TO FRAMING OF A BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT UNDER SEC. 144 OF THE ACT. 4. THE A.O DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OBSERVED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY PROCEE DINGS IT HAD EMERGED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD IN A.YS. 2009 - 10 TO 2011 - 12 MADE BOGUS PURCHASES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 42,42,97,705/ - FROM VARIOUS HAWALA PARTIES. THE A.O OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE INFORMATION GATHERED DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY ACTION IT WAS REVEALED THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL BOGUS PURCHASES OF RS. 42.43 CRORE (APROX) MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE PERIOD SPREAD OVER A.Y. 2009 - 10 TO A.Y. 2011 - 12, BOGUS PURCHASES TO THE EXTENT OF R S . 4,00,28,638/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S KOTSONS IMPEX PVT. LTD. PERTAINED TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, I.E A.Y. 2009 - 10. THE ASSESSEE IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED UNDER SEC. 131 ADMITTED THAT THE PURCHASES OF GOODS AGGREGATING TO RS. 42.43 CRORE WERE ACTUALLY MADE BY HIM FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET , AND HE HAD ONLY IN ORDER TO FACILITATE ROUTING OF THE SA ID PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS THROUGH HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAD PROCURED BOGUS BILLS FROM THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDERS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IT HAD MADE PURCHASES OF THE GOODS FROM THE O PEN/GREY MARKET TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CUSTOMERS DUE TO SCARCITY OF GOODS AT BPCL AND HPCL DEPOTS. THE ASSESSEE F URTHER STATED THAT BY PURCHASING THE GOODS FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET SAVED ON THE VAT LIABILITY WHICH VARIED FROM 4% TO 12.5%. THE ASSESSEE ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 4 FURTHER SUBMITTE D THAT BY MAKING THE PURCHASES OF INFERIOR QUALITY OIL FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET, HE WOULD ALSO ENJOY ENHANCED PROFIT MARGIN OF 4% TO 5%. THE ASSESSEE IN THE BACKDROP OF THE ADDITIONAL PROFIT WHICH HE WAS GENERATING FROM MAKING OF PURCHASES FROM THE OPEN/G REY MARKET, THEREFORE, CAME UP WITH A DISCLOSURE OF AN ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 11.15 CRORES FOR A.YS 2009 - 10, 2010 - 11 AND 2011 - 12, BIFURCATED DETAILS OF WHICH IS AS UNDER: - A.Y TOTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS TAKEN ADDITIONAL INCOME DISCLOSED 2009 - 10 RS. 4,00,28,638/ - RS. 1,25,00,000/ - 2010 - 11 RS. 16,91,27,381/ - RS. 4,50,00,00 0 / - 2011 - 12 RS. 21,51,41,686/ - RS. 5,40,00,000/ - TOTAL RS. 42,42,97,705/ - RS. 11,15,00,000/ - THUS, ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID DISCLOSURE THE ASSESSEE OFFERED AN ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5. HOWEVER, T HE A.O DID NOT ACCEPT THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECLINED TO RESTRICT THE ADDITIONAL INCOME PERTAINING TO THE BOGUS PURCHASES OF RS. 4,00,28,638/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION TO THE SAID EXTENT, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: (I). THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS WHICH COULD GO TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM THAT HE HAD MADE PURCHASE S OF THE GOODS FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET. ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 5 (II). THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD THE DETAILS ABOUT THE BROKERS THROUGH WHOM THE PURCHASES WERE MADE FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET. (III). THE ASSESSEE HAD NEITHER FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF THE UNDISCLOSED SUPPLIERS FROM WHOM PURCHASES WERE MADE FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET, NOR PLACED ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE WHICH COULD GO TO EVIDENCE THAT THE PURCHASES WERE MADE ON CREDIT, FAILING WHICH IT COULD SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED T HE GOODS IN CASH. (IV). THAT AS THE HAWALA PARTIES IN THEIR STATEMENTS RECORDED BY THE SALE TAX AUTHORITIES HAD ADMITTED THAT THEY HAD NOT SUPPLIED ANY GOODS AND WHATEVER PAYMENTS WERE RECEIVED FROM THE PARTIES WE RE RETURNED IN CASH AFTER DEDUCTING COMMI SSION, THEREFORE, IT COULD SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH PURCHASES FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET , WHICH THUS WAS LIABLE TO BE DISALLOWED UNDER SEC. 40A(3) OF THE ACT. (V). THAT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE PRIMARY ONUS T HAT IT HAD ACTUALLY PURCHASED THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEREFORE, IT COULD SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN THE GARB OF THE PURCHASES CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THE AFOREMENTIONED HAWALA PARTIES, HAD ACTUALLY BROUGHT HIS OWN UNACCOUNTED S TOCK IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. 6. THE A.O ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS CONCLUDED THAT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD THE DETAILS OF PARTIES FROM WHOM AND HOW THE PURCHASES WERE MADE BY HIM, THEREFORE , IN THE ABSENCE OF THE REQUISITE DETAILS THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF PURCHASE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 4,00,28,638/ - WAS LIABLE TO BE DISALLOWED UNDER SEC. 40A(3) OR SEC. 69C OF THE ACT. THE A.O AFFORDED ANOTHER ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 6 OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE GENUINENES S OF THE PURCHASES UNDER CONSIDERATION BY PLACING ON RECORD SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES , BUT T HE ASSESSEE FAILED TO AVAIL THE SAID OPPORTUNITY AND DID NOT CAME UP WITH ANY EXPLANATION, THEREFORE, THE A.O BEING GUIDED BY HIS AFORESAID CONVICTION DISAL LOWED THE ENTIRE PURCHASES OF RS. 4,00,28,638/ - AND MADE AN ADDITION TO THE SAID EXTENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO FORTIFY THE GENUINENESS OF PURCHASE S OF THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEREIN TRIED TO DRIVE FORCE FROM THE FACT THAT AS THE GROSS PROFIT RATE AND THE NET PROFIT RATE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE QUITE REASONABLE AS AGAINST THOSE OF THE PRECEDING YEARS , THEREFORE, THE GENUINENESS A ND VERACITY OF THE PURCHASE OF GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION COULD NOT BE DOUBTED . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER IN ORDER TO DRIVE HOME HIS AFORESAID CONTENTION AND PROVE THAT THE GOODS HAD ACTUALLY BEEN PURCHASED BY HIM, THEREIN SUBMITTED THAT THE QUANTITATIVE DETAILS OF THE PURCHASES CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THE AFORESAID HAWALA PARTY, VIZ. M/S KOTSONS IMPEX PVT. LTD HAD BEEN CORRELATED AS AGAINST THE DULY RECORDED SALE TRANSACTIONS. IT WAS THUS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AFORESAID FACTS PROVED THAT THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD ACTUALLY BEEN PURCHASED BY HIM . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER AVERRED BEFORE THE CIT( A ) THAT HE HAD IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE UNDER SEC. 148 OFFERED AN ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - TOWARDS THE PROF IT MADE FROM PURCHASING THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIT(A) THAT FOR A.Y 2011 - 12 HE HAD APPROACHED THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION , WHICH HAD AGREED FOR ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 5,40,00,000/ - ON THE T OTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS OF RS. 25,51,41,686/ - . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 7 SUBMITTED THAT IN HIS CASE FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 , THE DEPARTMENT HAD IN THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED UNDER SEC. 143(3) ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 4,51,41,770/ - ON THE TOTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS OF RS. 16,91,27,381/ - . THUS, TAKING SUPPORT OF THE AFORESAID FACTS IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT NOW WHEN DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HE HAD OFFERED AN ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - ON THE TOTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS OF RS. 4,0 0,28,638/ - , WHICH WORKED OUT TO MORE THAN 30%. , THEREFORE NO FURTHER ADDITION ON THE SAID COUNT WAS CALLED FOR IN HIS HANDS . THE CIT(A) AFTER DELIBERATING AT LENGTH ON THE AFORESAID SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THEREIN DID FIND FAVOUR WITH THE SAME AND ACCE PT ING THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ADDITION TO THE REGULAR RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 1,37,57,990/ - , THEREIN ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE . 7. THE REVENUE BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAD CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT A.R) FOR THE ASSESSEE SH. K. GOPAL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE THE PURCHASES OF T HE GOODS, THOUGH NOT FROM THE HAWALA PARTIES , BUT FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET . IT WAS AVE RRED BY THE LD. A.R THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO FACILITATE ROUTING OF THE AFORE SAID PURCHASES THROUGH HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAD PROCURED BILLS FROM THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES. THE LD. A.R SUBMITTED THAT NOW WHEN THE DULY RECORDED SALES OF THE GOODS CLAIM ED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE HAWALA PARTIES HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO REASON TO MAKE AN ADDITION/DISALLOWANCE OF THE ENTIRE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION OF THE SAID GOODS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . THE LD. A.R IN ORD ER TO DRIVE HOME HIS CONTENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE GO O DS FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET AND HAD ONLY OBTAINED BILLS FROM THE ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 8 AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES, THEREIN TOOK US THROUGH THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED ON OATH UNDER SEC. 131 DURING TH E COURSE OF SURVEY PROCEEDINGS CONDUCTED ON 04.02.2013. THE LD. A.R DREW OUR ATTENTION TO Q.NO. 9 AT PAGE 4 OF THE STATEMENT, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE IN HIS REPLY HAD CLEARLY STATED THAT IT HAD PURCHASED THE GOODS FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET AND HAD ONLY OBTAINED THE REQUISITE BILLS FROM THE AFOREMENTIONED HAWALA DEALERS . THE LD. A.R FURTHER TOO K US THROUGH PAGE 11 - 29 OF HIS PAPER BOOK (FOR SHORT APB), WHEREIN TH E COMPLETE CHART CORRELATING THE PURCHASES OF RS. 4,00,28,638/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S KOTSONS IMPEX PVT. LTD , HAD ON BILL /TRANSACTION WISE BASIS HAD BEEN CORRELATED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THE CORRESPONDING SALES THAT STOOD RECORDED IN HIS BOOKS OF AC COUNT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THUS, IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS IT WAS AVERRED BY SHRI K. GOPAL , THE LD. A.R, THAT NOW WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD OFFERED AN ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - ON THE TOTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS OF RS. 4,00 ,28,638/ - , THEREFORE, NO FURTHER ADDITION WAS CALLED FOR IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE A.O. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES FOR BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDER S OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND FIND SUBSTANTIAL FORCE I N THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY MR. K. GOPAL, THE L D. A.R FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND OURSELVES TO BE I N AGREEMENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE A.O THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PURCHASE D THE GOODS FROM THE AFORESAID HAWALA DEALER , VIZ. M/S KOTSONS IMPEX P. LTD . HOWEVER, IN THE BACKDROP OF THE FACT THAT THE SALE S HAD NOT BEEN DOUBTED BY THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, I T CAN SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THAT THE SAME WERE PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM UNIDENTIFIED PARTIES OPERATING IN THE OPEN/GREY MARKET. WE HAVE ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 9 PERUSED THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY PROCEEDINGS AND FIND THAT HE HAD RIGHT FROM INCEPTION CLAIMED THAT THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE PURCHASED FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET , AND HE HAD ONLY TO FACILITATE ROUTING OF THE PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS THROUGH HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT , PROCURED BOGUS BILLS FROM THE HAWALA PARTIES . WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE SAID CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE CHARACTERISED AS AN EYE WASH, AS WE FIND THAT THE CORRESPONDING SALES OF THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD DUL Y BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. WE ARE PERSUADED TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE CIT(A) THAT NOW WHEN THE DULY RECORDED SALES OF THE GOODS UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE A.O, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE TO BE RESTRICTED ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF THE PROFIT INVOLVED IN MAKING O F THE PURCHASES UNDER CONSIDERATION BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE OPEN/GREY MARKET. WE HAVE DELIBERATED ON THE FACTS OF HE CASE AND HOLD A STRONG CONVICTION THAT THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE PROFIT MADE ON MAKING OF THE PURCHASES OF THE GOODS FROM THE OPEN/HAWALA MARKET, WHICH WORKS OUT TO MORE THAN 30%, IS ALSO FOUND TO BE FAIRLY SUFFICIENT AND WOULD NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART . WE ARE RATHER UNABLE TO COMPREHEND THAT NOW WHEN THE REVENUE W HILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SEC. 143(3) IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 , WHEREIN SAME FACTS WERE INVOLVED, HAD ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 4,51,41,770/ - (I.E 26.69% OF PURCHASES) ON THE TOTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS OF RS. 16,91,27 ,381/ - TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE S AID YEAR, THEN , IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH COULD HAVE PERSUADED THE A.O TO CONCLUDE THAT THE BOGUS PURCHASES FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE DIFFERENTLY PLACED AS AGAINST THAT OF THE SUCCEEDING YEAR, VIZ. A.Y. 2010 - 11 , THERE APPEARS TO BE NO LOGICAL REASON FOR THE A.O TO HAVE TAKEN AN INCONSISTENT ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 10 APPROACH AND NOT ACCEPTED THE PROFIT OF RS. 1,25,00,000/ - (I.E 31.22% OF PURCHASES) WHICH WAS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE TOTAL ACCOMMODATION BILLS OF RS. 4,00,28,638/ - FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. W E THUS , IN THE BACKDROP OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS ARE PERSUADED TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE CIT(A), AND FINDING NO REASON TO DISLODGE HIS VIEW, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE SAME. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 1 TO 4 RAISED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE US ARE DISMISSED. 9. THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08 /1 1 /2017. SD/ - SD/ - ( B.R BASKARAN ) (RAVISH SOOD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; 08 . 1 1 .2017 / 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 . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI . ACIT VS. VINOD HARIRAM NARSINGHANI ITA NO. 19 1 /MUM/2016 11