VIJAY GIRJASHANKAR TRIVEDI, MUMBAI V. ITO WARD-3(4), KALYAN

ITA 2361/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6277 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Accommodation entries
• Section: 147; 148; 250

Judgement Text

P a g e | 1 ITA No.2361/Mum/2023 Vijay Girjashankar Trivedi Vs. ITO Ward 3(4) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2361/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2009-10) Vijay Girjashankar Trivedi D-304, Draupaid Vihar, Devi Chowk Shastri Nagar Dombivali West Maharashtra – 421202 Vs. ITO Ward 3(4) 2 nd Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Road, Kalyan O Maharashtra 421301 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No:AABPT3167E Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant by : None Respondent by : Ajay Singh Date of Hearing 09.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 20.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM): This appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order passed by the NFAC dated 30.05.2023 for A.Y. 2009-10. The assessee has raised the following grounds before us: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in passing the order and dismissing the appeal without granting sufficient opportunity of hearing to the appellant. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition made by Ld. A.O. of Rs.23,82,756/- being 100% of alleged to be bogus. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition upto 20% made by Ld. A.O. of Rs.41 500/- as indirect expenses claimed by appellant. P a g e | 2 ITA No.2361/Mum/2023 Vijay Girjashankar Trivedi Vs. ITO Ward 3(4) 4. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal.” 2. Fact in brief is that the return of income declaring total income of Rs.123,720/- was filed on 29.09.2009. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing of notice u/s 148 on 30.03.2016 on the basis of information received from Sale Tax Department that assessee has obtained accommodation entries of purchases made from the following parties: Hawala Tin Hawala Name F.Y. Amount (Rs.) 27020229342V Universal Enterprise 2008-09 8,05,804/- 27110574467V Apex Steel 2008-09 3,90,936/- 27230613104V Arihant Traders 2008-09 4,00,624/- 27940631968v Varah Laxmi Sales Agency 2008-09 7,85,392/- Total 23,82,756/- 3. During the course of assessment the assessing officer stated that assesse has failed to prove the genuineness of the purchases made from the aforesaid parties, therefore, 100% of such purchases was disallowed and added to the total income of the assesse. 4. The assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) stated that inspite of issuing a number of notices the assessee had not made any compliance, therefore, in the ex-parte order passed u/s 250 of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed, by restricting the disallowance to the extent of 20% of such bogus transactions. 5. Heard the ld. D.R. and perused the material on record. The assessee pleaded as per ground no. 1 of appeal filed that sufficient opportunity of hearing was not granted by the ld. CIT(A). We find that in the order u/s 250 of the Act passed by the ld. CIT(A), the detail of issuing any service of notices of hearing to assessee were not provided. Therefore, in the interest of justice to decide the issue in appeal on P a g e | 3 ITA No.2361/Mum/2023 Vijay Girjashankar Trivedi Vs. ITO Ward 3(4) merits we consider it appropriate to restore this case to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding denovo after providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to make the compliance before the ld. CIT(A) without any failure. Therefore, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 20.10.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Kuldip Singh) (Amarjit Singh) Judicial Member Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 20.10.2023 Rohit: PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.