ITO 29(3)(5), Mumbai V. SHRI. SANDEEP SURESH MAYEKAR, Mumbai

ITA 2334/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5820 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY PRATAP SINGH
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3); 133(6); 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI , ! BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . 2334 / / 2019 (%. .2011-12 ) ITA NO. 2334/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2011-12) INCOME TAX OFFICER 29(3)(5), C-10, 2 ND FLOOR, ROOM NO.211, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BKC, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI 400 051. / VS. : / APPELLANT SHRI SANDEEP SURESH MAYEKAR, ROOM NO.1262, BLDG. NO.52, SHRADHA CO-OP. HSG. SOC., KANNAMWAR NAGAR -1, VIKHROLI (EAST), MUMBAI 400 079 PAN:AKRPM6350L : / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY PRATAP SINGH / DATE OF HEARING : 13/10/2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/01/2021 / ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-40, MUMBAI ( IN SHORT THE CIT (A)) DATED 30/01/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS EMANATING FROM RECORDS ARE: THE ASSESSEE IS AN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETU RN OF INCOME FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR ON 30/09/2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOM E OF RS.9,76,346/-. THE RETURN 2 ITA NO. 2334/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2011-12) OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( IN SHORT THE ACT). ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECE IVED FROM SALES TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA BY DGIT(INV.), THE ASSESS MENT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 WAS REOPENED. AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS TO THE T UNE OF RS.2,53,664/- FROM M/S. SHRUTI TRADERS. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF THE PUR CHASES. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES AS NEITH ER THE DOCUMENTS VIZ.DELIVERY CHALLANS, OCTROI RECEIPTS, TRANSPORT RECEIPTS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE TRAIL OF GOODS NOR THE ASSESSEE COULD PRODUCE SUPPLIER O F GOODS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) TO THE SUPPLIER HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADD ITION OF RS.75,490/- BY ADOPTING GP RATE OF 29.76%[GP DECLARED BY ASSESSEE] ON THE S AID BOGUS PURCHASES. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19/01/2016 PASSED UND ER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT( A). THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF CASE AND VARIOUS D ECISIONS RENDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON SIMILAR ISSUE RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO 6%. HENCE, THE PRESENT APPEAL BY THE REVENUE. 3. SHRI AJAY PRATAP SINGH, REPRESENTING THE DEPARTM ENT SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF B OGUS PURCHASES BY ADOPTING GP RATE DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE ADDITION MADE IN ASSESSMENT ORDER IS JUSTIFIED AND REASONABLE. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REP RESENTATIVE PRAYED FOR REVERSING THE FINDING OF CIT(A) AND UPHOLDING THE ADDITION MA DE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4. THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE HEARD AND ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW EXAMINED. THE ASSESSEE IS AN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR. THE ASSESSEE ALLEGEDLY OBTAINED BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS T O THE TUNE OF RS.2,53,664/- FROM M/S.SHRUTI TRADERS, A SUSPICIOUS DEALER. SINCE, TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.75,490/- IN 3 ITA NO. 2334/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2011-12) RESPECT OF BOGUS PURCHASES BY ADOPTING GP RATE OF 2 9.76%. THE CIT(A) GRANTED PART RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY RESTRICTING ADDITION TO 6% OF THE BOGUS PURCHASES. CONSIDERING THE SMALLNESS OF AMOUNT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL BY REVENUE I DO NOT DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. 6. NO APPEAL/CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF BENCH. IN CASE ANY APPEAL/CROSS OBJECTIONS BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST IMPUGNED ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NO TICED,, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED AND THE CROSS APPEALS MAY BE LISTED TOGETH ER FOR DISPOSAL BY A COMMON ORDER . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY, THE 08 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021. SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / MUMBAI, (%/ DATED: 08/01/2021 VM , SR. PS(O/S) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ) / THE APPELLANT , 2. *+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ,+ ( )/ THE CIT(A)- 4. ,+ CIT 5. -.*+% , . . . , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. ./012 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI