ITO-8(2)(4), MUMBAI V. SUNBEAM MONOCHEM PVT LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 40/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8850 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHTAR HANSARI
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3); 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 40/MUM/2019 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) I.T.O.-8(2)(4), ROOM NO. 618, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020. VS. M/S SUNBEAM MONOCHEM PVT. LTD., 201/B, RUNWAL & OMKAR ESQUARE, OPP. SION CHUNABHATTI SIGNAL, EASTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, SION (E), MUMBAI-400022. PAN/GIR NO.AABCS 8172 P (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY SHRI AKHTAR H ANSARI (DR) ASSESSEE BY SHRI SATISH R. MODY (AR) DATE OF HEARING 13/01/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 13/01/2020 / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-14, MUMBAI DATED 21/08/2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT). 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RESTRICTING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF B OGUS PURCHASES TO THE EXTENT OF 12.5%. ITA NO. 40/MUM/2019 ITO VS SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P LTD. 2 3. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PER USED. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED CO MPANY AND FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 29/09/2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCO ME OF RS. 26,29,054/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED ON THE PLE A THAT THE ASSEESSEE HAS MADE BOGUS PURCHASES WITHOUT TAKING A CTUAL DELIVERY OF GOODS. AFTER RECORDING REASONS, THE A.O. REOPENED T HE ASSESSMENT AND ADDED 100% OF SUCH ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES IN A SSESSEES INCOME. 4. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LD CIT(A) HAS RESTRIC TED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 12.5% AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS JU DICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS AS STATED AT PAGE 8 TO 12 OF HIS APP ELLATE ORDER. AGAINST WHICH, THE REVENUE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEF ORE THE ITAT. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND FOUND THA T THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. AS PER THE INFORMATION BY THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT. HOWEVER, THE SALES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT DISPUTED. AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOU NCEMENTS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 12.5% MAINLY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SIMIT SHETH (2013) 38 TAXMANN.COM 385 (GUJ) AND IN THE CASE OF VIJAY M. MISTRY CONSTRUCTION LTD. 355 ITR 498 (G UJ). AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE, ITA NO. 40/MUM/2019 ITO VS SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P LTD. 3 THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THAT 12.5% ADDITION IN RESPECT OF BOGUS PURCHASES WILL SERVE THE END OF JUSTICE. NOTHING WA S BROUGHT ON RECORD SO AS TO PERSUADE ME TO DEVIATE FROM THE FINDINGS O F THE LD. CIT(A) IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 12.5%. AC CORDINGLY, I DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A) AND UPHOLD THE SAME. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH JANUARY, 2020. SD/- (R.C.SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 13/01/2020 *RANJAN COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//