INCOME TAX OFFICER 12(3)(3), MUMBAI V. M/S.M.M.BOUTIQUE PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

ITA 5902/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8864 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D G PANSARI
• Keywords: Business income; Opportunity of being heard; Accommodation entries; Set aside
• Section: 133(6); 144

Judgement Text

P A G E | 1 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5902 /MUM/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013 - 14 ) ITO - 12(3(3), R.NO. 224 , 2 ND FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 20 VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. [ EARLIER KNOWN AS MANGALMURTI ENTERPRISES & TRADING PVT. LTD.] A - 305, SAI PALACE, VAITIWADI LOTUS GATE, ACHOLE ROAD NALASOPARA EAST, THANE - 401209 PAN AAHCM5579N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI D.G. PANSARI, D.R RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 19 .06.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 2 8 .06.2019 O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 20, MUMBAI, DATED 01.06.2017, WHICH IN TURN ARISES FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O UNDER SEC. 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT ACT), DATED 31.02.2016 FO R A.Y. 2013 - 14. THE REVENUE HAS ASSAILED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING G ROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE US: 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN ESTIMATING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.11,05,857/ - BEING 0.12% OF TOTAL SALE TURNOVER OF RS.92,15,47,374/ - AS A GAINST INCOME ASSESSED U/S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT BY THE AO RS.1,84,14,168/ - BEING COMMISSION EARNED @ 1% OF THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM OF SALES AND PURCHASES AMOUNTING TO RS.1,84,14,168/ - REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNTS. P A G E | 2 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. 2. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE ID. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT SALE AND PURCHASE OF CLOTHS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WERE GENUI NE DESPITE THE FACT THAT - (I) NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR THE PARTIES DURING THE COURSE OF INQUIRIES U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT WERE ABLE TO PRODUCE ANY DETAILS RELATING TO DESCRIPTION OF THE GOODS, TRANSPORTATION AND DELIVERY OF GOODS IN QUESTION. (II) OUT OF THE TOTAL 11 PARTIES, ONLY TWO PARTIES HAD SUBMITTED THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNTS AND EVEN THESE PARTIES DID NOT SUBMIT THE SPECIFIC DETAILS CALLED FOR. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE COULD SUBMIT CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNTS FROM 4 PARTIES ONLY AND EVEN IN RESPECT OF THESE PARTI ES, NO DESCRIPTION OF GOODS, TRANSPORTATION & DELIVERY OF GOODS, COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME, BALANCE SHEET AND P&L ACCOUNT OF SALE AND PURCHASE PARTIES WERE SUBMITTED. 3. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT( A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUBSTITUTING THE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT OF ASSESSING OF FICER PASSED U/S 144 OF THE I.T ACT AFTER REJECTING BOOKS OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE WITH HIS OWN JUDGMENT AND THAT TOO WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASON/BASIS, WHATSOEVER, FOR E STIMATING INCOME 0.12% OF SALE. 4. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER ALL OR ANY GROUNDS OR ADD A NEW GROUN D WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD E - FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2013 - 14 ON 31.03.2014, DECLARING ITS TOTAL INCOME AT RS.2,95,650/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUT INY ASSESSMENT UNDER SEC. 143(2) OF THE ACT. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE A.O ON A PERUSAL OF T HE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OBSERVED, THAT THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAD CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN TEXTILES, DEALING IN GREY AND GREY FABRICS HAD SHOWN PU RCHASES AND SALES, AS UNDER: SALES RS.92,15,47,374/ - PURCHASES RS.91,98,69,480/ - OPENING STOCK NIL CLOSING STOCK NIL ON BEING CALLED UPON TO FURNISH PARTY WISE DETAILS OF PURCHASES AND SALES, THE SAME WERE FURNISHED BY THE AS S ESSEE , AS UNDER: P A G E | 3 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. PURCHASE : SR. NO. NAME TOTAL PURCHASE (RS.) 1. ASTRAL TEXTILE TRADING LTD. 9,03,75,140/ - 2. PARDHA 9 SHADES FASHIONS PVT. LTD. 76,49,72,274/ - 3. SALASAR FABTEX PVT. LTD. 2,16,50,151/ - 4. SHREE BAJRANG TRADERS 1,65,71,682/ - 5. BARASANA FABTEX PVT. LTD. 2,63,00,233/ - TOTAL 91,98,69,480/ - SALE : SR. NO. NAME TOTAL SALES (RS.) 1. AGRI FIBRE LTD. 70,41,90,608/ - 2. ALKA FIBER PVT. LTD. 3,22,16,778/ - 3. KUBER CORPORATION 1,38,36,264/ - 4. R.S. ENTERPRISE 3,00,000/ - 5. SATYEN WEAVES 1,63,65,077/ - 6. SHREE BAJRANG TRADERS 12,68,55,630/ - 7. VENUS LIFESTYLES LTD. 2,77,83,017/ - TOTAL 92,15,47,374/ - 4. OBSERVING , THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED MEAGRE TRADING PROFIT OF ONLY RS.2,95,650 / - AS AGAINST SUBSTANTIAL VOLUME OF PURCHASE/SALE TRANSACTIONS, THE A.O HAD DOUBTS AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRADING ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE SAID PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTIONS, THE A.O ISSUED NOTICES UNDER SEC. 133(6) TO ALL OF THE PARTIES WITH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TO HAVE CARRIED OUT SUCH TRANSACTIONS. THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES WERE CALLED UPON BY THE A.O TO FURNISH THE BILL WISE DETAILS OF THEIR TRADING TRANSACTIONS WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y ALONG WITH COPIES OF BILLS, DELIVERY CHALLANS, OCTROI RECEIPTS, MODE OF TRANSPORTATION AND RECEIP TS THEREOF, WEIGHMENT SLIP S ETC. FURTHER, THEY WERE ALSO DIRECTED TO PRODUCE THE SALES REGISTER, STOCK REGISTER AND GOODS MOVEMENT REGISTER FOR THE RELEVAN T PERIOD. APART THERE FROM, THE AFORESAID SUPPLIER PARTIES WERE ALSO DIRECTED TO SUBMIT THE QUANTITATIVE STATEMENTS OF SALES MADE TO THE ASSESSEE , AND WERE ALSO QUERIED AS TO WHETHER THE SAID P A G E | 4 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. TRANSACTIONS WERE CARRIED OUT DIRECTLY OR THROUGH ANY BROKER/AGENT . HOWEVER , IN RESPECT OF ALL THE PARTIES FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TO HAVE CARRIED OUT PURCHASES , THE NOTICES ISSUED UNDER SEC. 133(6) WERE RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARKS OF LEFT/NOT KNOWN , EXCEPT FOR IN THE CASE OF O NE OF T HE PARTY VIZ. M/S PARDH A 9 SHADES FASHIONS PVT. LTD., WHEREIN THE LATTER HAD FURNISHED THE COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT . IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, THE A.O CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ALL THE PARTIES FOR VERIFYING THE GENUINENES S OF THE PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTION S . IN COMPLIANCE, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE CONFIRMATION OF FOUR PARTIES FROM WHOM PURCHASES WERE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN MADE VIZ. (I) ASTRAL TEXTILE TRADING LTD.; (II) PARDHA 9 SHADES FASHIONS PVT. LTD.; (III) SALSAR FABTEX PVT. LTD.; (IV) SHREE BAJARANG TRADERS. APART THERE FROM, THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO FORTIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASE TRANSACTION ALSO PLACE D ON RECORD CERTAIN PURCHASE INVOICES. HOWEVER, THE A.O WAS NOT IMPRESSED WITH THE DOCUMENTARY EV IDENCE PLACE D ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS ATTEMPT TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASE/SALE TRANSACTIONS. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O , THAT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD CERTAIN DOCUMENTS VIZ. COPY OF BILLS, MODE OF TRANSPORT OF GOODS, DESCRIPTION OF GOOD S, COPIES OF RETURN OF INCOME, COMPUTATION OF INCOME, BALANCE SHEET S AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT S OF THE CONCERNED PARTIES, THEREFORE , THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT WITH T HE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES COULD NOT BE PROVED. FURTHER, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO NOT BEEN ABLE TO PLACE ON RECORD THE CONFIRMATIONS O F ALL THE PARTIES. APART THERE FROM, THE A.O OBSERVED THAT A PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS AC COUNT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2012 AND 31.03.2013 ALSO DID NOT INSPIRE ANY CONFIDENCE AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRADING ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. IN FACT, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O , THAT A P A G E | 5 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. PERUSAL OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND OTHE R EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED REVEALED, THAT NO EXPENDITURE WITH REGARD TO TRANSPORTATION, LOADING, UNLOADING, LABOUR CHARGES ETC., WHICH WERE VERY MUCH INDISPENSABLY REQUIRED FOR RUNNING THE AFORESAID BUSINESS WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED . IN THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE GENUINENESS OF ASSESSES CLAIM OF TRADING IN GREY AND GREY FABRICS COULD NOT BE ACCEPTED. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O R EJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE TRADIN G RESULTS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONCLUDED , THAT THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT ENGAGING ITSELF INTO ANY GENUINE BUSINESS HAD MERELY PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION PURCHASE AND SALE BILLS TO THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES, FOR WHICH IT HAD RECEIVED UNEXPLAINED COMMISSION INCOME. ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID DELIBERATIONS, THE A.O BEING OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAD EARNED COM MISSION @ 1% ON THE AFORESAID PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTIONS, THEREIN WORKED OUT ITS COMMISSION INCOME AT RS. 1,84,14,168/ - I.E @ 1% OF RS.1,84,14,16,168/ - [RS.92,15,47,374/ - (SALES) (+) RS.91,98,69,480/ - (PURCHASE S )] . 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED TH E MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) AFTER DELIBERATING ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE , WAS OF THE VIEW , THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED ITS ONUS BY FILING THE REQUISITE DETAILS I.E PURCHASE BILLS, SALE BILLS, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT, COPY OF AUDIT RE PORT AND CONFIRMATIONS FROM FEW PARTIES WITH WHOM IT HAD ENTERED INTO PURCHASE AND SALES TRANSACTIONS DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION . FURTHER , IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE CIT(A), THAT THOUGH THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE PRIMARILY ON THE GROUND THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED UNDER SEC. 133(6) WERE RETURNED UNSERVED, HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO DIRECT EVIDENCE WHICH COULD CONCLUSIVELY PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ONLY PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION BILLS TO THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES. RATHER, IT WAS P A G E | 6 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. OBSERVE D BY THE CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO FORTIFY THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE PURCHASE/SALE TRANSACTIONS HAD PLACED ON RECORD SUFFICIENT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID DELIBERATIONS, THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A . O COULD NOT BE FULLY SUSTAINED. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN ALL FAIRNESS COULD BE REASONABLY ESTIMATED @ 0.12% OF THE SALES TURNOVER OF RS.92,15,47,374/ - , WHICH WORKED OUT TO AN AMOUNT OF RS.11,05,857/ - . OBSERVING, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY DECLARED ITS BUSINESS INCOME OF RS.2,95,650/ - FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE EXTENT OF RS.8,10,207/ - [RS.11,05,857/ - ( - ) RS.2,95,650/ - ] . 6. THE REVENUE BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAS CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE RESPONDENT DESPITE HAVING BEEN PUT TO NOTICE AS REGARDS THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL HAS FAILED TO PUT UP AN APPEARANCE BEFORE US. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE CONSTRAINED TO PROCEED WITH THE APPEAL AS PER RULE 25 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963 AND DISPOSE OFF THE SAME AFTER HEARING THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSING THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 7. AS IS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THE ASSESSEE HAD DURI NG THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION CLAIMED TO H AVE CARRIED OUT BUSINESS OF TRADING IN TEXTILE, DEALING IN GREY AND GREY FABRICS AT A SUBSTANTIAL SCALE. AS PER THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TO HAVE CARRIED OUT SUBSTANTIAL PURCHASES AND SALES OF RS.91,98,69,480/ - A ND RS.92,15,47,374/ - , RESPECTIVELY, DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. WE FIND THAT AS REGARDS THE AFORESAID SUBSTANTIAL PURCHASE/SALE TRANSACTIONS, THE P A G E | 7 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN A MEAGRE TRADING PROFIT OF ONLY RS.2,95,650/ - . IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE MEAGRE TRADING PROFIT REFLECTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS AGAINST THE SUBSTANTIAL TRADING TRANSACTIONS, JUSTIFIABLY TRIGGERED DOUBTS IN THE MIND OF THE A.O AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS AND VERACITY OF THE TRADING ACTIVITIES THAT WERE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT BY IT DURING THE YEAR . WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SPECIFIC DIRECTION BY THE A.O TO FURNISH REQUISITE DETAILS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE VERIFICATION OF THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTIONS, HO WEVER, FAILED TO DO THE NEEDFUL . AS IS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THE ASSESSEE DESPITE HAVING BEEN SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO FURNISH CERTAIN DETAILS, VIZ. COPY OF BILLS, MODE OF TRANSPORTATION OF G OODS, DESCRIPTION OF GOODS, COPIES OF RETURNS OF INCOME, COMPUTA TION OF INCOME, BALANCE SHEET S AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT S OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES, HOWEVER , FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD THE SAID DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. A PART THERE FROM, THE ASSESSEE AS OBSERVED BY US HEREINABOVE ALSO FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTI ON OF THE A.O AND DID NOT PRODUCE THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES FOR NECESSARY VERIFICATION OF THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT THE NOTICE S ISSUED UNDER SEC. 133(6) BY THE A.O TO THE AFORESAID PA RTIES, WHEREIN THEY WERE DIRECTED TO PLACE ON RECORD CERTAIN DETAILS ALONG WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS WERE ALSO RETURNED UNSERVED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARKS LEFT/NOT KNOWN. IN FACT, ONLY ONE O F THE SO CALLED PURCHASE PARTY I.E M/S PARDHA 9 SHADES FASHIONS PVT. LTD. , HAD IN PART COMPLIANCE TO THE AFORESAID NOTICE FURNISHED THE COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS APPEARING IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. APART THERE FROM, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD ONLY PLACE ON RECORD CONFIRMATIONS OF 4 OF THE PARTIES (OUT OF 5 PARTIES) FROM WHOM PURCHASES WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE VIZ. (I) ASTRAL TEXTILE TRADING LTD.; (II) PARDHA 9 SHADES FASHIONS PVT. LTD.; (III) SALASAR P A G E | 8 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. FABTEX PVT. LTD.; AND (IV) SHREE BAJRANG TRADERS. AS REGARDS THE PARTIES TO WHOM SALES WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE, NO CONFIRMATION WAS FURNISHE D WITH THE A . O. 8. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS AS ARE DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES , WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTION S ON THE BASIS OF ANY CLINCHING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. ACCORDINGLY, THE AFORESAID FACTS IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW SUFFICED RAISING OF DOUBTS AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRADING ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. APART THERE FROM, WE FIND THAT THE A.O ON PERUSAL OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND OTHER EXPENSES BOOKED BY THE ASSESSEE, HAD OBSERVED , THAT NO EXPENDITURE WITH REGARD TO TRANSPORTATION, LOADING, UNLOADING, LABOUR CHARGES ETC. WHICH WOULD HAVE BE EN INDISPENSABLY INCURRED IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF THE AFORESAID TRADING BUSINESS , WAS HOWEVER FOUND TO HAVE BEEN BORNE BY THE ASSESSEE. I N THE BACKDROP OF THE SUBSTANTIAL TURNOVER SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE, THE A.O HELD A CONVICTION THAT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ASSESSES CLAIM OF HAVING CARRIED OUT THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN TEXTILE, DEALING IN GREY AND GREY FABRICS DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DID NOT INSPIRE ANY CONFIDENCE , AND THUS COULD NOT BE ACCEPTED. 9 . WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ISSUE BEFORE US AND FIND SUBSTANTIAL FORCE IN THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE A.O. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE TO THE HILT ITS CLAIM OF HAVING CARRIED OUT THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN TEXTILE, GREY AND G REY FABRICS. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ONLY FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE GENUINENESS OF ITS TRADING TRANSACTIONS , BUT HAD ALSO DESPITE SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS OF THE A.O FAILED TO PRODUCE THE PARTIES FOR EXAMINATION BY THE A.O. APART THERE FROM, THE FACT THAT THE ASS ESSE E HAD NOT INCURRED P A G E | 9 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. ANY EXPENDITURE WITH REGARD TO TRANSPORTATION, LOADING, UNLOADING, LABOUR CHARGES ETC. , WHICH WERE VERY MUCH REQUIRED FOR RUNNING THE AFORESAID BUSINESS ALSO RAISES SERIOUS DOUBTS AS REGAR DS THE VERACITY OF THE AFORESAID CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAD DURING THE YEAR CARRIED OUT THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN TEXTILES, GREY AND GREY FABRICS ETC. AS IS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ORD ERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, A PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCO UNT OF THE ASSESSEE REVEALS THAT THOUGH THERE WAS INFLOW AND OUTFLOW OF ENORMOUS VOLUME OF GOODS BY WAY OF PURCHASES/SALES, HOWEVER, NO EXPENSES FOR THE MOVEMENT OF GOODS, ITS STORAGE IN GODOWN, TRANSPORTATION , LOADING AND UNLOADING WERE BOOKED BY THE ASSE SSEE. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE , AND ALSO A PERUSAL OF THE FACTS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE RECORDS , DOES NOT INSPIRE ANY CONFIDENCE AS REGARDS THE VERACITY OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAD DURING THE YEAR CARRIED OUT GENUINE TRADING BUSINESS. AT THE SAME TIME, WE FIND THAT THE A.O WITHOUT MAKING ANY THOROUGH VERIFICATION S AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS OF THE BUSINESS O F THE ASSESSEE HAD HUSHED THROUGH THE MATTER , AND WITHOUT PLACING ON RECORD ANY SUPPORTING MATERIAL HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO THE AFORESAID PARTIES. ADMITTEDLY, AS OBSERVED BY US HERE INABOVE , THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO PLACE ON RECORD SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND ALSO NOT PRODUCING THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES FOR NECESSARY EXAMINATION BEFORE THE A.O DOES RAI SE SERIOUS DOUBTS AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS OF ITS BUSIN ESS. APART THERE FROM, THE FACT THAT ABSENCE OF CERTAIN EXPENSES VIZ. TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES , LOADING CHARGES, UNLOADING CHARGES, LABOUR CHARGES AND OTHER SUCH EXPENSES , WHICH INDISPENSABLY WOULD BE INCURRED IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF TRADING BUSINESS AS CLA IMED BY THE ASSESSEE , FURTHER FORTIFIES THE DOUBTS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CARRIED OUT ANY GENUINE TRADING P A G E | 10 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. BUSINESS, AS CLAIMED BY IT. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN ABLE TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS AS WAS CAST UPON IT TO PROVE THE AUTHE NTICITY OF ITS TRADING BUSINESS AND THEREIN DISPEL THE DOUBT S RAISED AS REGARDS THE GENUINENESS OF IS TRADING ACTIVITIES, NOR THE A.O HAD CONCLUSIVELY PROVED ON THE BASIS OF IRREFUTABLE AND CLINCHING MATERIAL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DURING THE YEAR MERELY PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO THE AFOREMENTIONED PARTIES. WE THUS , IN ALL FAIRNESS , ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES TO BE REVISITED BY THE A.O FOR MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATIONS. ACCORDINGLY, THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE F ILE OF THE A.O, WHO SHALL IN THE COURSE OF THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION S AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAD DURING THE YEAR CARRIED OUT TRADING IN TEXTILES, GREY AND GREY FABRICS ETC., OR NOT. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE A.O SHALL IN THE COUR SE OF THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE , WHO SHALL REMAIN AT A LIBERTY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM OF HAVING CARRIED OUT GENUINE TRADING BUSINESS DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY , THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORE D TO THE FILE OF THE A.O FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS. 10 . THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 8 .06.2 019 S D / - S D / - ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) (RAVISH SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; 2 8 .06.2019 PS. ROHIT P A G E | 11 ITA NO.5902/MUM/2017 A.Y. 2013 - 14 ITO - 12(3)(3) VS. M/S M.M. BOUTIQUE PVT. LTD. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI