The Dy. CIT,Anand Circle, Anand V. M/s. Parikh Art Jewellers, Anand

ITA 2803/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7977 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: B T THAKKAR
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Set aside
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3); 133A; 40(a)(ia); 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH (BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA. NO: 2803/AHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE, 204, 3 RD FLOOR, S.P. PATEL COMPLEX, NEAR OLD C.K. HALL, MAYFAIR ROAD, ANAND-388001 V/S M/S. PARIKH ART JEWELLERS, LILAVATI SHOPPING CENTER, NEAR BANK OF BARODA, STATION ROAD, ANAND- 388001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AADFP 0104D APPELLANT BY : SHRI LALIT P. JAIN, SR. D .R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. T. THAKKAR, C.A. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 18 -11-201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 -12-2019 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-4, VADODARA DATED 30.08.2017 PERTAINING TO A .Y. 2014-15 AND FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN: ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 2 1.1 THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND .IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION TOWARDS PURCHASES WI THOUT EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 1.2 THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION TOWARDS PURCHASES WI THOUT EXAMINING, OR DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE, WHETHER EXPENDITU RE TOWARDS PURCHASES WAS ALTERNATIVELY DISALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 40A(3), PA RTICULARLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THAT THE ENTIRE PURCHASES WERE IN CASH, AND HAD FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM PURCHASES WERE MAD E. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION WITHOUT EXAMINING THIS, AND I N NOT CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN JANSAMPARK ADVERTISING & MARKETING (P) LTD. 375 ITR 373 (DELHI) REGARDING FURTHER INQUIRY IN SUCH CASES . 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, MODIFY, AMEND OR ALTER ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF, OR BEFORE, THE HEARING OF AP PEAL. RELIEF CLAIMED IN APPEAL IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS IN THE B USINESS OF SALE OF SILVER ARTICLE AND THE FIRM IS IN THE BUSINESS SINCE 1990. AS A RE GULAR TRADE PRACTICE, THE RESPONDENT FIRM PURCHASES OLD SILVER ARTICLES FROM WALK IN CUSTOMERS. SUCH PURCHASE OF OLD SILVER ARTICLES IS RECORDED IN BOOK S AS URD PURCHASE. ALL MOST ALL SUCH PURCHASES ARE IN VERY SMALL QUANTITY AVERA GING TO RS. 1000 AND AROUND AND FOR TOTAL PURCHASE OF RS. 240.66 LAKHS AND MORE THAN 22,000 PURCHASE WILLS WERE ISSUED. 3. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD A.O., AS SESSEE STATED THAT ALL PURCHASES WERE MADE IN CASH AND FROM WALK IN CUSTOM ERS. BUT LD. A.O. WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE AD DITION OF RS. 24066271/-. 4. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER, ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST ST ATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WITH FOLL OWING OBSERVATION: ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 3 THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE IDENTICAL WITH A.Y.2007- 08. THE RECORDS MAINTAINED BY THE APPELLANT ARE SAM E AND THE NET PROFIT RATE OVER THE YEARS IS ALSO PROGRESSIVE. AS POINTED OUT BY THE CIT(A) IN PARA ABOVE, IN RESPECT OF A.Y.2007-08,; THIS YEAR ALSO THERE IS NO CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT ASSESSEE HAS EITHER PAID MORE PRICE TO SELLERS OF SILVER THAN THE MARKET PRICE OR THAT THERE IS SUPPRESSION OF SALES. IN VIEW OF T HE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE'S OWN, CASE, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER'S ACTION OF DISALLOWING THE ENTIRE PURCHASE IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. SINCE, THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANYTHING TO SHOW THAT THE CORRESPONDING S ALES OUT OF SUCH PURCHASES HAVE NOT BEEN MADE OR THERE IS ANY DISCREPANCY IN T HE STOCK REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE APPELLANT LEADING TO DEBIT OF EXCESS PURCHAS E WITHOUT ANY CORRESPONDING ENTRY FOR SALE IN THE STOCK, AND THERE BEING NO FIN DING THAT THE RATES ON WHICH THE SILVER HAS BEEN PURCHASED ARE MORE THAN THE MARKET RATE PREVAILING OR THE DATE OF PURCHASES, THE ENTIRE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DI RECTED TO BE DELETED. THE GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 5. NOW REVENUE HAS COME BEFORE US AND CHALLENGE THE OR DER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT RECORD AND IMPUGNED ORDER. CASE IN OUR HAND IS SQUARELY COVERE D BY THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2007-08 IN ITA NO. 393 /AHD/2014 WHEREIN IN SIMILAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, ITAT GRANTED RELIE F TO THE ASSESSEE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WITH FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AS SESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SALE O F SILVER ORNAMENTS. ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS FRAMED ON 25.1 1.2009 ASSESSING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.10,87,780/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSME NT WAS REOPENED UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT FOLLOWED BY NOTICE U/S 148 O F THE ACT. ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 AND 144 OF THE ACT WAS FINALIZED ON 28.03.2013 ASSESSING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,82,36,680/- AFTER MAKING ADDITION TO WARDS BOGUS PURCHASES AT RS.1,71,17,469/- AND DISALLOWANCE OF AUDIT FEES AT RS.31,427/-. ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 4 3. ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO DE LETED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF BOGUS PURCHASES OF RS.1,71,17,469/- AND SUSTAINED THE ADDITION U/S 40(A)(IA) TOWARDS DISALLOWANCE OF AUDIT FEES. 4. AGGRIEVED, REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL. 5. LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. WHEREAS LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS MANUFA CTURING SILVER JEWELLERY AND PURCHASING OLD SILVER ARTICLES FROM WALK IN CUS TOMERS ON CASH BASIS FOR WHICH COMPLETE DETAILS LIKE QUANTITY PURCHASED, RATE AND THE AMOUNT PAID ARE MAINTAINED AND ARE TERMED AS URD PURCHASES. BOOKS O F ACCOUNTS ARE REGULARLY MAINTAINED FOLLOWING MERCANTILE METHOD OF ACCOUNTIN G AND THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THIS ACCOUNTING SYSTEM FOLLOWED SINCE 1990 I.E. THE START OF THE BUSINESS. THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AND SALES AND PURCHASES HAVE B EEN REGULARLY ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN ALL THE PAST YEARS AND EVEN IN SU BSEQUENT YEARS. MOST OF THESE URD PURCHASES ARE BELOW THE VALUE OF RS.10,000/- FO R EACH TRANSACTION. ALL NECESSARY DETAILS OF PARTYWISE SALES HAVE BEEN DULY PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND NO MISTAKE HAS BEEN POINTED O UT. LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED AND NO D ISCREPANCY IN THE BOOKS ARE OBSERVED IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS IN T HE RE-ASSESSMENT. FURTHER THERE CANNOT BE ANY SALE WITHOUT PURCHASE AND GP RATIO FO R ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005- 06,2006-07 & 2007-08 AS PER AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS G.P. FOR ALL THESE YEARS ARE 10.01%, 9.7% AND 9.45% RESPECTIVELY. 7. LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 29.02.2008 AND P HYSICAL STOCK OF 421.361 KGS. WAS FOUND AS AGAINST THE BOOKS ENTRIES OF 424.317 K GS. WHICH STRENGTHENS THE AUTHENTICITY OF REGULAR STOCK MAINTAINED. FURTHER, IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE SAME ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ASST. YEAR 2008-0 9 NO SUCH DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE. DUE TO ALL THESE FACTS LD. CIT(A) HAS RI GHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.1,71,17,469/-. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS AGA INST THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,71,17,469/- MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE FIRM HAS BEEN REGULARLY CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SELLING OF SILVER ARTICLES ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 5 SINCE 1990. IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS, PURCHASE OF SILVER ARTICLES FROM WALK IN CUSTOMERS ARE MADE AND ALL THESE TRANSACTIONS FIND PROPER PLACE IN THE STOCK RECORD AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS REGULARLY MAINTAINED A ND AUDITED. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE IMPUGNED AD DITION BY PASSING SPEAKING ORDER OBSERVING AS BELOW :- 4.3 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS WEL L AS THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE AR OF THE APPELLANT. IN THIS CASE, THE AO HAS DISAL LOWED ENTIRE PURCHASES MADE BY THE APPELLANT ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT COUL D NOT FURNISH THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM SUCH PURCHASES WERE MADE. AT THE SAME TIME HE HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE APPELLANT COULD NOT PROVIDE CONF IRMATION WITH IDENTITY PROOF OF CUSTOMERS TO WHOM SALES WERE MADE. THE AO HAS ME NTIONED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD CATEGORICALLY EXPRESSED ITS INABILITY TO OBTAIN SUCH CONFIRMATIONS IN RESPECT OF SALES VIDE PARA 4 OF 'SUBMISSION DATED 2 5.03.2013. THE APPELLANT HAS FURNISHED COPIES OF LETTER DATED 08.03.2013 AND 25. 03.2013'FURNISHED BY IT TO THE AO. IN THE LETTER DATED 08.03.2013, THE APPELLANT H AS PROVIDED COMPLETE DETAILS WITH ADDRESSES, PAN NO, AND CONFIRMATION/COPY OF LE DGER ACCOUNT WITH CONTRA ACCOUNT FROM THE BOOKS OF THESE PARTIES FOR 6 PERSO NS TO WHOM THE SALES ABOVE RS.50,000/- HAD BEEN MADE. ONLY IN RESPECT OF PERSO NS TO WHOM SALES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.10,000/- BUT LESS THAN RS. 50,000/- HA D BEEN MADE, THE APPELLANT HAS STATED THAT IT HAS NOT MAINTAINED RECORDS LIKE ADDRESS ETC. FOR SUCH PARTIES. THUS, THE AO'S STATEMENT THAT NONE OF THE SALES COU LD BE PROVED BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT CORRECT 4.3.1. BESIDES, ANOTHER FACTOR WHICH IS VERY IMPORT ANT FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE IN HAND IS THAT THE SAME AO HAD PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2008-09 IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. A COPY OF THIS ASSESSMENT OR DER DATED 26.11.2010 HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT. A PERUSAL OF THIS ORDER SHOWS THAT THERE WAS A SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE IT ACT AT THE PREMISES OF THE APPEL LANT ON 29.02.2008 DURING WHICH AN INVENTORY OF PHYSICAL STOCK AS WELL AS INV ENTORY AS PER, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE PREPARED AND A SHORTAGE OF 2.956 KGS. OF SILVER WAS FOUND. THIS FACT CLEARLY ESTABLISHES THAT THE APPELLANT IS ACTUALLY CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SILVER ARTICLES. THE PHYSICAL STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY WAS 421.361 KGS. WHEREAS, AS PER THE BOOKS O F ACCOUNT THE STOCK OF SILVER WAS 424.317 KGS. THIS ESTABLISHES THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT WAS MAINTAINING ITS STOCK REGISTER... EVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, FOR THE CURRENT APPEAL, NO DISCREPANCIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAS BEEN MENT IONED BY THE AO DESPITE THE ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 6 FACT THAT THE AO HAS CLEARLY STATED THAT HE HAD VER IFIED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ETC, PRODUCED WITH THE COPY OF 'SHRI CHANDI GHAT KHARID K HATU 06-07 (URD)' FOR PURCHASE OF SILVER. THUS, THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT DOUBTFUL. , 4.3.2. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, SINCE, THE APPELLANT MAINTAINING PROPER STOCK REGISTER FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF SILVER ARTICLES, HENCE, IT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD AS TO HOW THE ENTIRE PURCHASE CAN BE DISALLOWED AND ADDED AS INCOME TO THE APPELLANT WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THAT THERE WAS NO SALE. IT IS AN ESTABLISHED FACT THAT THERE CAN BE NO SALE OF AN ITEM WITHOUT ITS PURCHASE. IF THE AO HAD ANY DOUBT IN THIS REGARD, THEN A PROPER ACTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO VERIFY THE RATES ON WHICH THE PURCHASES HAD BEEN MADE AND TO SEE THAT WHETHER THE AMOUNTS DEBITED ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH PURCHASE ARE AS PET-THE PREVAILING RATE OF SILVER ON THE DATE OF PURCHASE OR NOT. NO SUCH ENQUIRY HAD BEEN CONDUCTED BY THE AO, IT HAS BEEN THE PLEA OF THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE AO RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING THAT ALL THE PURCHASES ARE BEING MADE OF SMALL AMOUNTS FROM WALK IN CUSTOMERS AND HENCE, THE RECORDS OF SUCH CUSTOMERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE AS THE PURCHASES ARE OF VERY SMALL AMOUNT. IN NO CASE, PURCHASES OF AMOUNT EXCEEDING T 20,000/- HAS NOT BEEN FOUND AS NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 40A(3) OF THE IT ACT H AS BEEN MADE BY THE AO IN HIS ORDER. THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN ABLE TO TALLY ITS STO CK FROM ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHICH HAVE BEEN DULY FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE AO. THE APPELLANT IS MAKING ENTRIES IN ITS PURCHASE REGISTER ON DAY TO D AY BASIS FOR WHICH QUANTITY OF PURCHASE ARE ALSO ENTERED. THE AMOUNTS PAID ARE BAS ED ON THE RATE PREVAILING ON THE DATE OF PURCHASE. THE AO HAS NOT CONSIDERED THI S ARGUMENT AT AL' AND SIMPLY DISALLOWED THE PURCHASES ON ACCOUNT OF APPELLANT'S FAILURE TO PROVIDE DETAILS OF PERSONS FROM WHOM SUCH PURCHASES WERE MADE. IT IS I MPORTANT HERE TO NOTE THAT THE SAME AO WHILE PASSING THE ORDER FOR THE SUBSEQU ENT ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. AY 2008-09 HAS NOT MADE ANY SUCH ADDITION AND HENCE, H AS NOT MENTIONED ANY FACT DISCOVERED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY WHICH COULD HAVE MADE SUCH PURCHASES DOUBTFUL. 4.3.3. EVEN IN THE DIRECTION U/S 144A OF THE IT ACT , THE JCIT HAS ACCEPTED THE FACT THAT THE ADDRESSES OF ALL SMALL PURCHASERS CANNOT B E KEPT, LOOKING INTO THE VOLUME OF TRANSACTIONS RUNNING IN HUGE NUMBERS. HIS DIRECTION WAS TO VERIFY THE BIG PURCHASES ONLY. DESPITE, THIS THE AO HAS DISALL OWED THE ENTIRE PURCHASES AND THUS HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE BINDING DIRECTION OF THE SUPERIOR OFFICER. 4.3.4 THE AO HAS MENTIONED THAT NOT EVEN SINGLE INS TANCE OF CORRESPONDING SALES OUT OF SILVER PURCHASE OF RS.1,71,17,469/- FR OM CUSTOMERS WAS CONFIRMED ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 7 WITH IDENTITY PROOF IN ANY CASE. THUS, THE CORRESPO NDING SALES FROM THE ABOVE SILVER PURCHASE WERE ALSO FOUND TO BE BOGUS. THIS S TATEMENT IS EVIDENTLY WRONG ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT VIDE ITS LET TER DATED 08.03.2013 HAD PROVIDED COMPLETE DETAILS OF PARTIES TO WHOM SALES OF T 50,000/- HAS BEEN MADE BY IT. THE AMOUNT OF SUCH SALES COMES TO RS. 1,74,4 6,291/-. THIS FACT HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED BY THE AO IN HIS ORDER IN PARA 2 OF PAGE NO. 5. 4.3.5. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO FURNISHED COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.11.2009 PASSED IN THIS CASE. IN THIS ORDER , THE AO HAD MENTIONED THAT THE NET PROFIT OF THE APPELLANT DURING THE AY 2007- 08 WAS 1.42% AS AGAINST 1.26% SHOWN IN THE EARLIER YEAR. THUS, THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN BETTER BOOK RESULTS IN THIS YEAR. THIS FACT WAS ALSO IGNORED BY THE AO WHI LE PASSING THE REASSESSMENT ORDER. 4.3.6. THUS, THE AO'S ACTION OF DISALLOWING THE ENT IRE PURCHASE IS NOT SUSTAINABLE ON THE BASIS OF FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE EXPLANATI ONS FILED BY THE APPELLANT. SINCE, THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANYTHING TO SHOW THAT THE CORRESPONDING SALES OUT OF SUCH PURCHASES HAVE NOT BEEN MADE OR T HERE IS ANY DISCREPANCY IN THE STOCK REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE APPELLANT LEAD ING TO DEBIT OF EXCESS PURCHASE WITHOUT ANY CORRESPONDING ENTRY FOR SALE I N THE STOCK, AND THERE BEING NO FINDING THAT THE RATES ON WHICH THE SILVER HAS B EEN PURCHASED ARE MORE THAN THE MARKET RATE PREVAILING OR THE DATE OF PURCHASES , THE ENTIRE ADDITJOA.M.A.DE-BY THE AO IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 9. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS TOUCHED UPON ALL TH E FACTS AND MOST IMPORTANTLY WE OBSERVE THAT IN THE SURVEY PROCEEDIN GS U/S 133A OF THE ACT A MINOR SHORTAGE OF 2.95 KGS. OF SILVER WAS DETECTED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS THE PHYSICAL STOCK WAS FOUND AT 421.361 KGS. AS AGA INST THE BOOKS ENTRIES OF 424.317 KGS. FURTHER WE ALSO FIND THAT SAME ASSESSI NG OFFICER WHO HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR ASST. YEAR 2007-08 HAS ALSO FR AMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR ASST. YEAR 2008-09 I.E. FOR THE YEAR THE SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED AND NO SUCH ADDITION OF BOGUS PURCHASES HAS BEEN MADE. 10. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT AS PER THE COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF GP RATIO THERE IS A CONSISTENCY IN THE GP RATE FROM ASST. YE AR 2005-06 TO ASST. YEAR 2007- 08 WHICH HAS BEEN SHOWN 10.01%, 9.7% AND 9.48% RESP ECTIVELY. WE ARE THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE TYPE OF BUSINESS ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED FOR THE M ERE REASON THAT PURCHASES ARE ITA NO. 2803 /AHD/2017 . A.Y. 2014-1 5 8 MADE IN CASH CANNOT TENTAMOUNT TO PROVE THEM BOGUS WHEN AUTHENTICITY OF SALE IS NOT DOUBTED AND PROFITS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE IN C ONSONANCE WITH THE PAST TRACK OF GP & NP RATES DULY ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES AND FURTHER ADDED BY THE FACT THAT IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR ALSO BOOK RESULTS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 11. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. 7. SO FAR JUDGMENT CITED BY THE REVENUE IN THE MATTER OF JANSAMPARK ADVERTISING & MARKETING (P.) LTD. IS CONCERNED, THE SAME IS NO T RELEVANT TO THE CASE IN OUR HAND. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20 - 12- 2019 SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 20/12/2019 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD