ITO- 17(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI V. M/s. IRON AND STEEL TRADERS, MUMBAI

ITA 6373/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9377 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Accommodation entries

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई Įी ǒवकास अवèथी, Ûयाियक सदèय IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 6373/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2011-12) ITA NO.6373/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2011-12) ITO-17(2)(1), Room No. 115, Kautalya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051. ...... अपीलाथȸ /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/s Iron and Steel Traders, 18, Steel Yard, Iron Market, Mazgaon, Mumbai-400009. PAN: AAAFI0306B ..... Ĥितवादȣ/Respondent अपीलाथȸ Ʈारा/ Appellant by : Sh. Sanjay J. Sethi Ĥितवादȣ Ʈारा/Respondent by : Sh. Dalpat Shah सुनवाई कȧ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 26/07/2021 घोषणा कȧ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : 04/10/2021 आदेश/ ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] ' dated 15.07.2019 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. Sh. Sajjay J. Sethi representing the Department submitted that the assessee has obtained accommodation entries aggregating to Rs. 2,45,113/- 2 आअसं. 6373/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2011-12) ITA No. 6373/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12) from Mahendra Shantilal Patel, a bogus entry provider on commission basis. Thus, the Assessing Officer (AO) made addition of the entire bogus purchases. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the entire addition. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR) submitted that the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee was not able to discharge its onus in proving genuineness of the purchases, no confirmations were filed by the assessee nor the assessee was able to produce the suppliers. The CIT(A) has deleted the entire addition merely on surmises and conjectures. 3. On the other hand, Sh. Dalpat Shah representing the assessee vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal by the Revenue. 4. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIT(A) has deleted the addition by observing that the AO has made addition merely on preponderance of probabilities without their being any cogent evidence or circumstances indicating assessee’s involvement in obtaining accommodation entries. I concur with the findings of CIT(A) and hence upheld the same. 5. In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, being devoid of any merit. Order pronounced in the open court on Monday, the 04 th day of October, 2021. Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) Ûयाियक सदèय / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई/Mumbai, Ǒदनांक/Dated: 04/10/2021 3 आअसं. 6373/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2011-12) ITA No. 6373/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12) SK, PS Ĥितिलǒप अĒेǒषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/The Appellant , 2. Ĥितवादȣ/ The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुƠ(अ)/ The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आयुƠ CIT 5. ǒवभागीय Ĥितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुबंई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड[ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai