Kuruvilla Alexander, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 8(1), Pune

ITA 644/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6752 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI , AM . / ITA NO. 644 /P U N/201 8 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 1 - 1 2 KURUVILA ALEXANDER, FLAT NO.2, PLOT NO.85, PREMSAGAR APARTMENT, UDYAM NAGAR, PUNE . / APPELLANT PAN: A A NPA4943K VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WAD 8(1) , PUNE . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.K. KULKARNI / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH GAWALI / DATE OF HEARING : 02 . 0 1 .201 9 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21 . 0 1 .201 9 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M : THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST ORDER OF CIT (A) - 6 , PUNE , DATED 1 2 . 0 1 .201 8 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 1 - 1 2 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHOR T THE ACT) . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL: - ITA NO. 644 /P U N/201 8 KURUVILA ALEXANDER 2 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UP HOL DING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. OF 100% B OGUS PURCHASE ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAD ADMITTED THE SAID DISALLOWANCE OF BOGUS PURCHASES. THE ADMISSION WAS UNDER MIS - CONCEPTION OF LAW AND FACTS. THE REASONABLE PERCENTAGE OF INCOME BE DIRECTED TO BE ESTIMATED INSTEAD OF 100% ADDITION OF SUCH BOGUS PURCHASES. 3. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER DELAY OF EIGHT DAYS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND MERIT IN THE PLEA OF ASSESSEE AND THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL LATE BY EIGHT DAYS IS CONDONED 4. BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF VARIOUS TYPES OF PRECISION TOOLS AND PROCESSING CHARGES THEREOF. THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECEI VED I NFORMATION FROM SALES TAX DEPARTMENT, MAHARASHTRA IN RESPECT OF HAWALA DEALERS. THE INFORMATION RECEIVED ALSO CONTAINS THE DETAILS OF BENEFICIARIES OF SUCH BOGUS BILLS. THE PERSONS WHO HAVE PROVIDED ENTRIES TO VARIOUS BENEFICIARIES HAVE ALSO FILED A FFIDAVITS BE FORE THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT STATING THEREIN THAT THEY HAVE MERELY PROVIDED ENTRIES TO THESE BENEFICIARIES AND THAT NO GOODS AS MENTIONED IN THE PURCHASE BI LLS WERE ISSUED BY THEM. AS PER INFORMATION RECEIVED, THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO OBTAINED B OGUS PURCHASE BILLS FROM THE ENTRY PROVIDER. NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AFTER RECORDING REASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THAT THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE TREATED AS RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED, SHRI SANJA Y VAIDYA, C.A. AND AR OF THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED FROM TIME TO TIME AND SUBMITTED THE DETAILS AS CALLED FOR FROM TIME TO TIME. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 12.08.2014 STATED AS UNDER: - ITA NO. 644 /P U N/201 8 KURUVILA ALEXANDER 3 . I AM READY TO AGREE TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES OF RS.1,21,501/ - AS PER YOUR PERSPECTIVE TO BUY PEACE OF MIND AND REQUEST YOUR HONOUR TO TAX APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF INCOME WITH RESPECT TO THE SAID ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 5. IN VIEW OF ASSESSEES OFFER, DISALLOWANCE OF 1,21,501/ - WAS MADE TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES FROM HAWALA DEALERS. 6. THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE, IN VIEW OF ASSESSEE HAVING ADMITTED TO THE AFORESAID ADDITION. 7. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST T HE ORDER OF CIT(A). 8. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY WITHDRAWAL MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND IN VIEW OF AGREEMENT OF ASSESSEE ITSELF, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF RAISING ANY ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF JANUARY , 201 9 . SD/ - SD/ - (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SUSHMA CHOWL A ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 21 ST JANUARY , 201 9 . GCVSR ITA NO. 644 /P U N/201 8 KURUVILA ALEXANDER 4 / COPY OF THE ORDER I S FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 6 , PUNE ; 4. THE PR. CIT - 5 , PUNE ; 5. 6. , , , - / DR SMC , ITAT, PUNE; / G UARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE