SAY INDIA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI V. DCIT - 13(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6017/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3222 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JYOTHILAKSHMI NAYAKLD
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Accommodation entries; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 13(2); 148

Judgement Text

SAY INDIA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2009-10 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE HONBLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI HONBLE MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM ./ I.T.A. NO.6017/MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 ) & ./ I.T.A. NO.6018/MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 ) SAY INDIA J EWELLERS PVT. L TD. UNIT NO. 701, BLOCK NO. I SEEPZ++, SEZ MIDC, ANDHERI (EAST) MUMBAI- 400 096. / VS. M/S DCIT - 13(2) (1) AAYKAR BHAWAN M.K.ROAD MUMBAI- 400020 '( ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AAACM-7171-K ( (* /APPELLANT ) : ( +,(* / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS. JYOTHILAKSHMI NAYAK-LD. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 24/02/2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/03/2020 / O R D E R MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. AFORESAID APPEALS BY ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEA RS [IN SHORT REFERRED TO AS AY] 2007-08 & 2009-10 CONTEST SEPA RATE ORDERS OF LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY QUA CONFIRMATION OF CERTAIN ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. SINCE THE GRIEVANCE IS COMMON FOR BOTH YEARS, THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE NOW BEING SAY INDIA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2009-10 2 DISPOSED-OFF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SA KE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 2. NONE HAS APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE AND NO VALID ADJO URNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. HENCE, KEEPI NG IN VIEW THE NATURE OF ADDITIONS, THE MATTER WAS PROCEEDED WITH EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT REVENUES CRO SS-APPEAL FOR AY 2007-08 HAS ALREADY BEEN DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN THE ESTIMATION MADE BY LD. CIT(A) HAS BEEN HELD TO BE F AIR AND REASONABLE. AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION, OUR ADJUDICATION TO THE SU BJECT MATTER OF APPEAL WOULD BE AS GIVEN IN SUCCEEDING PARAGRAPHS. ITA NO.6017/MUM/2016 (AY 2007-08) 3.1 BRIEFLY STATED THE ASSESSEE BEING RESIDENT CORP ORATE ASSESSEE STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF JEWELLERY W AS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. ON 17/03/2015 WHEREIN IT WAS SADDLED WITH ADDITIONS OF RS.80.69 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED PURCHASES. THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) ON 12/11/2009 WHIC H WAS REOPENED AS PER DUE PROCESS OF LAW BY ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S 148 ON 25/03/2014. THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE TRIGGERED UPON RE CEIPT OF CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTME NT THAT THE ASSESSEE OBTAINED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES FROM SHRI RAJENDRA J AIN GROUP AS WELL AS FROM SHRI PRAVEEN JAIN GROUP. THE AGGREGATE OF S USPICIOUS PURCHASES SO MADE FROM 4 ENTITIES WAS RS.80.69 LACS , THE DETAILS OF WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN EXTRACTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3.2 ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE DEFENDED THE PURCHASES, B UT REJECTING THE SAME IN THE LIGHT OF FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATION TEAM , LD. AO DISALLOWED THESE PURCHASES AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SAY INDIA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2009-10 3 4.1 BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE ASSAILED REASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON LEGAL GROUND BUT THE SAME WERE REJEC TED IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT SPECIFIC INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED BY LD. AO REGARDING BOGUS BILLS. 4.2 ON MERITS, LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT CORRESPONDI NG SALES WAS REFLECTED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE PURCHASES SO MADE AND HENCE THE ARGUMENT THAT THERE COULD NE NO SALES WITHOUT PURCH ASES COULD NOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE EASILY. THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONS WERE ESTIMATED AT 15% OF THESE PURCHASES WHICH RESTRICTED THE IMPUGNED ADDIT IONS TO RS.12.10 LACS. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS ASSAILED REASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS WHICH WOULD STAND REJECTED SINCE LD. AO WAS CLINCHE D WITH SPECIFIC INFORMATION SUBSEQUENT TO COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT INDICATED POSSIBLE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME IN THE HAND S OF THE ASSESSEE. AT THAT STAGE, NOTHING MORE WAS REQUIRED AND LD. AO , UPON FORMATION OF REASONABLE BELIEF, REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT. THEREFO RE, NO INFIRMITY COULD BE FOUND, IN THIS REGARD, IN THE IMPUGNED ORD ER. 6. SO FAR AS THE ESTIMATION OF ADDITIONS ARE CONCER NED, WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE WAS ALSO UNDER APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS DISPOSED-OFF VIDE IT A NO. 5667/MUM/2016 ORDER DATED 08/11/2017 (WHICH HAS BEE N AUTHORED BY ONE OF US). UPON PERUSAL OF THE SAME, WE FIND THAT, VIDE PARA-5 OF THE ORDER, THE CO-ORDINATION BENCH HAS HELD THE ESTIMAT ION MADE BY LD. CIT(A) TO BE FAIR AND REASONABLE. THEREFORE, FOLLOW ING THE SAME, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL. SAY INDIA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2009-10 4 ITA NO.6018/MUM/2016 (AY 2009-10) 7. FACTS ARE PARI-MATERIA THE SAME IN THIS AY. THE ASSESSEE WAS SADDLED WITH ADDITIONS OF RS.3.45 LACS IN AN ASSESS MENT FRAMED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 ON 17/03/2015. THE LD. CIT(A) EST IMATED THE SAME @15%. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. SINCE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE IDENTICAL, TAKING THE S AME VIEW, WE DISMISS THE LEGAL GROUNDS AS WELL AS GROUNDS ON MERITS. THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. CONCLUSION 8. BOTH THE APPEALS STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH MARCH, 2020 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (M ANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 11/03/2020 SR.PS, JAISY VARGHESE !'! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. (* / THE APPELLANT 2. +,(* / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. 2 3+ 4 , 4 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 3 567 / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI.