ACIT 21 (1), Mumbai V. ANJANEYULU BACHAIH PERNE, Mumbai

ITA 5563/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2644 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SMITA VERMALD
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 143(2); 148

Judgement Text

1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE HONBLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND HONBLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING MODE) ./ I.T.A. NO.5563/MUM/2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) A CIT - 21(1) ROOM NO.116, 1 ST FLOOR PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL MUMBAI 400 012. / VS. ANJAN EYUL U BACHAIAH PERNE PLOT NO.930, OFFICE NO.2G PRABHAT CH SOC. ,OFF SAYANI ROAD, OPP. RAVINDRA NATYA MANDIR MUMBAI 400 025. $% # ./ # ./PAN/GIR NO. AACPP-0975-B ( ' %' /APPELLANT ) : ( ()%' / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. SMITA VERMA LD. SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 24/03/2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05/04/2021 / O R D E R MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. AFORESAID APPEAL BY REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2009-10 CONTESTS THE ORDER OF LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHO RITY DATED 13/06/2019 WHICH HAS PROVIDED CERTAIN RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE O N ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. 2. THOUGH NONE APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, MATE RIAL ON RECORD WAS SUFFICIENT FOR DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL. THE LD. DR PLEADED FOR RESTORATION OF ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY LD. AO. 2 3.1 THE MATERIAL FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING RESI DENT INDIVIDUAL STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN CIVIL WORK WAS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 ON 16/03/2015. THE ASSESSMENT WAS SO FRAMED PURSUANT T O RECEIPT OF CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM SALES TAX DEPARTMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE PROCURED ACCOMMODATION PURCHASE BILLS OF RS.4.73 LA CS FROM 2 PARTIES AS DETAILED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, N OTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED ON 18/03/2014 WHICH WAS FOLLOWED BY STATUTOR Y NOTICES U/S 143(2) & 142(1) CALLING FOR REQUISITE DETAILS FROM ASSESSE E TO SUBSTANTIATE THE PURCHASES SO MADE. 3.2 THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FILED CERTAIN DOCUMENTARY E VIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF PURCHASES, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD N OT PROVE THE CORRELATION OF THE SALES WITH THE PURCHASES. NO STO CK REGISTER COULD BE PRODUCED. CONSEQUENTLY, THE PURCHASES WERE DISALLOW ED AND ADDED BACK TO ASSESSEES INCOME. 4. UPON FURTHER APPEAL, LD. CIT(A), INTER-ALIA, NOT ED THAT THE SALES WERE NOT UNDER DOUBT AND THEREFORE, THE PROFIT EMBE DDED IN THESE TRANSACTIONS WAS TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX. THE ESTIMATI ON WAS MADE AT 25%. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. GOING BY THE FACTUAL MATRIX AS ENUMERATED IN THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE HAS RIGHTLY BEE N CLINCHED IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE BY LD. CIT(A). THE SALES TURNOVER WAS N OT IN DOUBT AND THE ASSESSEE WAS IN POSSESSION OF PRIMARY PURCHASE DOCU MENTS. THE PAYMENT TO THE SUPPLIERS WAS THROUGH BANKING CHANNE LS. THE FACTS OF THE CASE MADE IT A FIT CASE TO ESTIMATE THE PROFIT ELEM ENT EMBEDDED IN THESE TRANSACTIONS. CONCURRING WITH FINDINGS OF LD. CIT(A ) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL. 3 6. THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 05 TH APRIL, 2021 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : SR.PS, JAISY VARGHESE ! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' %'/ THE APPELLANT 2. ()%'/ THE RESPONDENT 3. !! (' ) / THE CIT(A) 4. !! / CIT CONCERNED 5. XY (Z, !' Z, / DR, ITAT, M UMBAI 6. Y\] / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI.