Satyanarayan Agrawal, Aurangabad V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Aurangabad

ITA 2183/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2300 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: THIS CONSOLIDATED
• Assessee Lawyers: RELATE TO A YRS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT . / ITA NOS.2183 & 2184/PUN/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2010-11 SHRI SATYANARAYAN AGRAWAL, BLOCK NO.88, MAHESH INDUSTRIES, MIDC CHIKALTHANA, AURANGABAD PAN : AAPPA5485N VS. ITO, WARD-1(2), AURANGABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE RELATE TO THE A.YRS. 2009-10 & 2010-11. SINCE THESE APPEALS ARE BASED ON COMMON FACTS AND IDENTICAL GROUNDS, I AM, THEREFORE, PROCEEDINGS TO DISPOSE THEM OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. SUCCINCTLY, THE FACTS FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10 ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CORRUGATION SHEETS AND APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAJESH GAWLI DATE OF HEARING 13-11-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14-11-2018 ITA NOS.2183 & 2184/PUN/2017 SATYANARAYAN AGRAWAL 2 BOXES. INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE AO FROM THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF THE BENEFICIA RIES WHO HAD TAKEN FAKE PURCHASE BILLS. AS PER SUCH INFORMATIO N, THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN FAKE PURCHASE BILLS TO THE TUNE OF RS.7,04,183/- FROM VARIOUS HAWALA DEALERS. SUCH FIGURE FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 WAS RS.6,18,903/-. THE AO MADE ADD ITION FOR THESE TWO SUMS IN THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS WHICH ADDITIONS CAME TO BE UPHELD IN THE FIRST APPEAL. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVAN T MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. IN FACT, THE NOTICE SENT THROUG H THE REGISTERED POST HAS BEEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK LEFT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEALS EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 4. COMING TO THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS SEEN THAT TH E AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE MADE AND SUSTAINED ADDITIONS ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM SALES TAX AUTHORITIES ABOUT THE ASSESSEE PROCURING FAKE BILLS THROUGH HAWALA TRANSACTIONS . IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO REBUT SUCH A POINT OF VIEW, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THESE TWO ADDITIONS. ITA NOS.2183 & 2184/PUN/2017 SATYANARAYAN AGRAWAL 3 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH NOVEMBER, 2018. SD/- (R.S.SYAL) / VICE PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 14 TH NOVEMBER, 2018 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (APPEALS)-1, AURANGABAD 4. / THE PR. CIT-1, AURANGABAD 5. , , SMC / DR SMC, ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE ITA NOS.2183 & 2184/PUN/2017 SATYANARAYAN AGRAWAL 4 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 13.11.18 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 13.11.18 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER - 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. - 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 13.11.18 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 14.11.18 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 14.11.18 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *