ACIT, Jaipur V. MAMTA SOGANI, Jaipur

ITA 581/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99488 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PREM PRAKASH MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: MUKESH GOYAL CA DHK
• Keywords: Accommodation entries
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 581/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09. ASST. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. SMT. MAMTA SOGANI, PROP. M/S PEACE INTERNATIONAL, 99, DHULESHWAR GARDEN,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AGWPS 9210 Q VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI PREM PRAKASH MEENA (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MUKESH GOYAL (CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 10.03.2017. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.04.2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), CENTRAL, JAIPUR DATED 28/07/2014 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2008-09. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED EFFECTIVE SOLITARY GROUND THAT READS AS UNDE R:- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE TRADING ADD ITION TO RS. 2,08,462/- AS AGAINST RS. 20,27,955/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT O F UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES AFTER REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT UNDE R SECTION 145(3) OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 2. BRIEFLY , STATED THE FACTS ARE THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT 1961(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS FRAMED VIDE ORDER DATED 20/12/2010 WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT IN RESPECT OF M/S ROYAL GEM & ARTS, K.S. EXPORT, SAMRIDHI JEWELLERS, GOVINDAM JEWELLERS, AAYUSH 2 ITA NO. 581/JP/2014 SMT. MAMTA SOGANI, JAIPUR. ENTERPRISES, ANUPAM EXPORT & IMPORT, BRIGHT METALS AND NAKODA GEMS & JEWELLERS WERE FOUND INVOLVED IN RACKET OF PROVIDING ACCOMMOD ATION ENTRIES AND PURCHASES FROM THESE PERSONS HAVE BEEN TREATED AS UNVERIFIABL E IN THE PRECEDING TWO YEARS, AND CONCLUDED THAT THE PURCHASES RECORDED BY THE AS SESSEE FROM THESE PERSONS/ CONCERN REMAINED UNVERIFIED. THEREFORE, HE PROCEED ED TO ESTIMATE GROSS PROFIT AND APPLIED THE RATE OF 25% IN RESPECT OF UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES. THUS, HE MADE ADDITION OF RS. 20,27,955/- IN THIS RESPECT. AGAIN ST THIS, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL. THEREBY, HE ESTIMATED GROSS PROFIT AT 8.75 %. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRES ENT APPEAL. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD REJECTED THE BOOKS O F ACCOUNTS ALBEIT THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED REJECTION OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BUT HE RESTRICTED THE TRADING ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 2,08,462/- AGAINST RS. 20,27,955/ - BY APPLYING THE GP RATE AT 8.75% AGAINST THE 25% APPLIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER. 3.1 ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE SUPPORTED THE REASONING OF THE LD. CIT(A). 3.2 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ONLY BASIS FOR ADOPTING GP RATE AT 8.75 % BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS THAT THE GROSS PROFIT IMPROVED DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 08-09 AS COMPARED TO 3.2% IN THE PREVIOUS ASSESSMENT YEAR. THIS FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE PLACING ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL ON RECORD . THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE WHERE THE GROSS PROFIT HA S INCREASED AND THE PURCHASES ARE 3 ITA NO. 581/JP/2014 SMT. MAMTA SOGANI, JAIPUR. TREATED AS UNVERIFIABLE ON THE BASIS THAT THE PURCH ASES MADE FROM THE PARTIES WHO INDULGED INTO PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND P URCHASES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD AS TO HOW TH ESE PURCHASES ARE UNVERIFIABLE WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD PROVIDED COPIES OF CONFIRMATI ON OF ACCOUNT FROM THE SAID SUPPLIERS. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE MADE FURTHER ENQUIRY FROM SUCH PARTIES, IF IN THE CROSS OF ENQUIRY THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAD BROUGHT SOME MATERIAL SUGGESTING THAT THESE PURCHASES WERE BOGUS IN THAT EVENT THE ENTIRE PURCHASES REQUIRED TO BE ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED INVES TMENT BUT IN THE PRESENT CASE IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH MATERIAL, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE INTO THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) SAME IS HEREBY AFFIRM. THE GROUN D RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS REJECTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 581/JP/2014 IS DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THURSDAY , THE 6 TH DAY OF APRIL 2017. SD/- SD/- ( HKKXPUN ( DQY HKKJR ) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 06/04/2017. POOJA/- VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR. 2. THE RESPONDENT SMT. MAMTA SOGANI, PROP. M/S PEA CE INTERNATIONAL, JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 581/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 4 ITA NO. 581/JP/2014 SMT. MAMTA SOGANI, JAIPUR.