IIyas Abdulsattar Shaikh, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Pune

ITA 444/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1524 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ARISE OUT OF COMMON PASSED
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / ITA NOS.444 & 445/PUN/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2011-12 SHRI ILYAS ABDULSATTAR SHAIKH, FLAT NO.L-502, MAHINDRA ROYALE SOCIETY, NEAR MASOLKAR COLONY, PIMPRI, PUNE 400 018 PAN : AQYPS2856C VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-8, PUNE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARISE OUT OF THE COM MON ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-9, PUNE ON 30-11-2016 IN RE LATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 & 2011-12. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVA NT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. IT IS SEEN THAT THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS.54,39,569/- FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10 AND RS.61,60,875 /- FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12 ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES. THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI PANKAJ GARG DATE OF HEARING 14-03-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15-03-2019 ITA NOS.444 & 445/PUN/2017 ILYAS A. SHAIKH 2 APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, REQUESTING FOR ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH COULD NOT BE PLACED BEFORE TH E AO. THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE PARA NO.8.4 ON PAGE 17 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DID NOT ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BY RECORDING THAT FIRST OF ALL, THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS WERE NOT MADE BEFORE THE AO AND THUS THESE ARE THE FRESH/ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. MOREOVER, NO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN RULE 46A HAS BEEN MADE BY THE APPELLANT. HENCE, THESE EVIDENCES ARE N OT ADMITTED. WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD MEET ADEQUATE LY IF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTO RED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRES H AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH MARCH, 2019. SD/- SD/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VI CE PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 15 TH MARCH, 2019 ITA NOS.444 & 445/PUN/2017 ILYAS A. SHAIKH 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. THE CIT(A)-9, PUNE 4. 5. 6. THE PR. CIT-5, PUNE , , / DR B, ITAT, PUNE; / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR P RIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 14-03-2019 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 14-03-2019 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *