SAMARTHMAL SANGHVI, MUMBAI V. ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 3463/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0195 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V JANARDHANAN
• Assessee Lawyers: GAUTAM SALECHA
• Keywords: Bogus purchase

Judgement Text

, SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3463/MUM/2017 : ASST.YEAR 2010-2011 SHRI SAMARTHMAL SANGHVI FIT-WELL INDUSTRIES, UNIT NO.10 GROUND FLOOR, TULSI BUILDING 178 KHETWADI BACK ROAD MUMBAI 400 004. PAN : AAFPS4195P. / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(3)(2) MUMBAI. ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) /APPELLANT BY : SHRI GAUTAM SALECHA /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V.JANARDHANAN (SR.DR) / DATE OF HEARING : 28.06.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.07.2017 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) DATED 09.02.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010- 2011. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE CONFIRMATION OF 12.5% MINUS GROSS PROFIT OUT OF BOGUS PURCHASES. 3. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE SHALL BE AGREEING TO THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A). THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF N.K.INDUSTRY V. DCIT [IT APPEAL NO.240 OF 2003 DATED 20.06.2016] WHEREIN THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAD HELD THAT 100% OUT OF BOGUS PURCHASES SHOULD BE ADDED INSTEAD ITA NO.3463/MUM/2017. SHRI SAMARTHMAL SANGHVI. 2 OF 25% ALLOWED BY THE ITAT. THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION AGAINST THIS ORDER HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT BY ORDER DATED 16.01.2017. 4. FURTHER, I FIND THAT THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL AND REVENUE IS NOT IN APPEAL. HENCE, IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO TAKE AWAY THE BENEFIT THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN GRANTED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, I UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY AGREED TO THIS PROPOSITION AND DID NOT PRESS ANY FURTHER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 03 RD DAY OF JULY, 2017. SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 03 RD JULY, 2017. DEVDAS* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. / CIT(A), MUMBAI 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. [ / GUARD FILE.