Meenu Jain, Panipat V. ITO WARD-02, Panipat

ITA 2859/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2544 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV DUDEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: PUNEET RAI
• Keywords: Bogus purchase

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI SMC-2 BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2859/DEL/2019 [ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11] SMT MEENU JAIN VS. THE I.T.O M/S GAUTAM INTERNATIONAL WARD - 2 85, OLD HOUSING BOARD COLONY PANIPAT PANIPAT, HARYANA PAN: AFCPJ 3258 A [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 17.03.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.03.2020 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PUNEET RAI, ADV REVENUE BY : SHRI GAURAV DUDEJA, SR. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS], KARNAL DATED 23.01.2019 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2 2. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE GRIEVANCE OF THE AS SESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDIT ION OF RS. 11.10 CRORES ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASES MADE FROM M/S GANPATI ENTERPRISES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CHALLENGED THE R EOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT HE IS NOT PRESSING THE GROUNDS CHALLENG ING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AND HENCE THE SAME IS D ISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 4. FACTS ON RECORD SHOW THAT ON THE BASIS OF INFOR MATION RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DDIT, INV, PANIPAT, THE ASSE SSING OFFICER CAME TO KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME BOGUS FIRMS IN PANIPAT WHO DO NOT PURCHASE ANYTHING AND WHO DO NOT DEPOSIT ANY VAT. ONE OF SUCH FIRMS WAS M/S GANPATI ENTERPRISES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PURCHASES FROM M/S GANPA TI ENTERPRISES AMOUNTING TO RS. 11,10,818/-. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAME AS BOGUS PURCHASES AND MAD E THE ADDITION. 3 5. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. C IT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. 6. BEFORE ME, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW MY ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHO RITY FOR A.Y 2011-12 AND POINTED OUT THAT THE VERY SAME FIRST AP PELLATE AUTHORITY HAS MADE THE ADDITION BY ESTIMATING THE P ROFIT @ 8% ON BOGUS PURCHASES. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE FURTHER DREW MY ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE SAME FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN THE CASE OF SANJAY GOYAL WHE REIN PURCHASES FROM THE SAME PARTY I.E. M/S GANPATI ENTE RPRISES, WERE TREATED AS BOGUS AND ADDITION HAS BEEN ESTIMAT ED @ 10%. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE THAT ON IDENTICAL FACTS, THE SAME FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS TAKEN DIVERGENT VIEWS. 7. I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW AND THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y REFERRED TO HEREINABOVE. I FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4 8. ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS AND ON IDENTICAL PURCH ASES WHICH WERE TREATED AS BOGUS, THE FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY HAS ESTIMATED THE ADDITION @ 8% AND 10% ON BOGUS PU RCHASES WHICH MEANS THAT THE ENTIRE PURCHASES HAVE NOT BEEN ADDED BUT ONLY THE PROFIT MARGIN HAS BEEN ADDED. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, I DEEM IT FIT TO ESTIMATE THE PROFIT @ 9% FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. I ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT TH E ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADD 9% OF THE BOGUS PURCHASES AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 2859/DEL/2019 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.03. 2020. SD/-/- [N.K. BILLAIYA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17 TH MARCH, 2020. VL/ 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) ASST. REGISTRAR, 5. DR ITAT, NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER