ASST CIT CIR 3, KALYAN V. VITHAL BINDURAO PARVATIKAR, DOMBIVALI

ITA 5432/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6717 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N HEMALATHA
• Keywords: Bogus purchase

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'G' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 5432/MUM/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 2ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION MURBAD ROAD KALYAN (W) 421301 VS. SHRI VITHAL BINDURAO PARVATIKAR PRO. OF M/S. BINDU TECH B-401, AMBIKA TOWER AYODHYA NAGARI DOMBIVILI (E) 421201 PAN AAXPP2061R APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: MS. N. HEMALATHA RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 25.06.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25.06.2018 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 27.06.2016 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-3, NASIK (CAMP OFFI CE THANE) AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2011-12. 2. REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) IN GRANTING PARTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE O F EXPENSES. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE RECORD WE NOTICED THAT THE BENCH HAS DIRECTED THE LEARNED D.R. TO SER VICE NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE BENCH, NOTICE WAS DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON 31.03.2018 BY THE AO. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE, ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BENCH. HEN CE, WE PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX-PARTE, WITHOUT THE PRESENC E OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED D.R. AND PERUSED THE REC ORD. THE AO PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDG EMENT UNDER SECTION ITA NO. 5432/MUM/2016 SHRI VITHAL BINDURAO PARVATIKAR 2 144 R.W.S. 147 OF INCOME TAX ACT (HEREINAFTER THE ACT), SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM. THE ASSESSMENT WAS REO PENED ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED GOODS FROM CERTAIN DEALERS WHO HAVE BEEN DECLARED AS HAWALA DEALERS AS THEY HAVE PROVIDED ONLY ACCOMMODATION EN TRIES WITHOUT ACTUALLY SUPPLYING MATERIAL. IN THE REOPENED ASSESSMENT THE AO DISALLOWED THE ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASE OF ` 41,490/- AND ALSO DISALLOWED 20% OF EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY THE LEARNED CIT(A) CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO. THE LEARNED CIT(A) SUSTAINED TH E DISALLOWANCE RELATING TO BOGUS PURCHASE TO 25% OF THE VALUE OF BOGUS PURCHAS E. IN RESPECT OF ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF 20% OF EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSE SSEE THE LEARNED CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE TO THE EXTENT OF ` 72,750/-. 6. THE LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT PROPERLY CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPOR T FURNISHED BY THE AO. THE LEARNED D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS SPECIFIC ALLY POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE THE STOCK REGISTER, EV IDENCE OF TRANSPORT OF MATERIAL, EVIDENCE FOR PAYMENT OF OCTROI, ETC., WHI CH ARE ESSENTIAL TO DETERMINE THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURN ISHED EVIDENCES SUPPORTING VARIOUS EXPENSES. THE LEARNED D.R. SUBMI TTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT SPECIFICALLY AD DRESSING THESE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE AO. 7. HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED D.R. AND UPON PERUSAL OF R ECORD WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE CONTESTED BY REVENUE IN THI S APPEAL NEEDS TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), SINCE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS NOT ADDRESSED FULLY THE VARIOUS DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER P ASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN A.Y. 2011-12 AND RESTORE THE SAME TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE AFRESH. ITA NO. 5432/MUM/2016 SHRI VITHAL BINDURAO PARVATIKAR 3 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JUNE, 2018. SD/ - SD/ - (AMARJIT SINGH) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 25 TH JUNE, 2018 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -NASIK -3, CAMP OFFICE-THANE 4. THE CIT - 1, THANE 5. THE DR, G BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.