ACIT CIR-6(3(2), MUMBAI V. KALPATARU ISPAT PVT. LTD. , MUMBAI

ITA 2901/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1163 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY PRATAP SINGH
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Tax effect; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI , ! BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . 2901 / / 2019 (%. .2010-11 ) ITA NO. 2901/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2010-11) THE ACIT, CIR-6(3)(2) ROOM NO.576, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020. / VS. : / APPELLANT M/S. KALPATARU ISPAT PVT. LTD., 508, GUPTA BHAVAN, AHMEDABAD STREET, CARNAC BUNDER, MUMBAI 400 009 PAN: AAACK5954G : / RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY PRATAP SINGH ASSESSEE BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 12/10/2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14/12/2020 / ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-12, MUMBAI [IN SHORT THE CIT( A)] DATED 07/01/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS EMANATING FROM R ECORDS ARE: THE ASSESSEE IS A WHOLESALE TRADER OF IRON & STEEL. ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM SALES TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA BY DGIT(INVES TIGATION), MUMBAI THE 2 ITA NO. 2906/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2011-12) ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED. AS PER INFORMATION RECEIVED, THE ASSESSEE ALLEGEDLY O BTAINED BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS AMOUNTING TO RS.3,20,675/- , FROM M/S. PADMALAXMI STEEL AND ALLOYS PVT. LTD. (RS. 3,12,650/-) AND P.K.TRADING CO.(RS.8,025/-). BOTH THE AFORESAID PARTIES WERE DECLARED HAWALA DEALERS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMM ODATION ENTRIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MADE ADDITION OF THE ENTIRE ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29/02/2016, PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961 ( IN SHORT THE ACT), THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A ) AFTER EXAMINING THE FACTS, RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO RS.40,084/- I.E. 12.5% O F THE BOGUS PURCHASES . AGAINST THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 3. SHRI AJAY PRATAP SINGH, REPRESENTING THE DEPARTM ENT SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019, DATED 08-08-2019 BUT THE CASE OF ASSESSEE FALLS UNDER EXCEPTION SPECIFIED IN PARA 10(E) OF CIRCULAR NO. 03 OF 2018 DATED 11/07/2018 AND AMENDED ON 20/08/2018 . THE LD.DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAD OBTAINED ACCOMMODATIONS ENTRIES FROM DECLARED HAWAL A DEALERS . DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRO VE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF T HE ENTIRE SUCH BOGUS PURCHASES. THE LD.DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE PRAYED FOR REVER SING THE FINDING OF CIT(A) AND RESTORING THE FINDING OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. BOTH SIDES HEARD, ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW EX AMINED. THE ASSESSEE IS STATED TO HAVE OBTAINED BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS AMOUNTING TO RS.3,20,675/- FROM TWO HAWALA DEALERS DURING THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YE AR UNDER APPEAL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF THE ENTIRE BOGUS PURCHASES . THE CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE TO 12.5% OF SUCH BOGUS PURCHASES. UND ISPUTEDLY, THE REVENUE HAS ACCEPTED THE SALES DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. WITH OUT CORRESPONDING PURCHASES 3 ITA NO. 2906/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2011-12) THERE CANNOT BE SALES, THEREFORE, IN SUCH LIKE BOGU S TRANSACTIONS IT IS ONLY THE PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED IN BOGUS PURCHASES THAT HAS TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX.[ RE.PCIT VS. PARAMSAKHTI DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD., INCOME TAX APPE AL NO.413 OF 2017 DECIDED ON 15/07/2019 BY HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT] I FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, HENCE, THE SAME IS UPHELD AND APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. 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 . 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY THE 14 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020. SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / MUMBAI, (%/ DATED: 14/12/2020 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