ITO 33(1)(5), MUMBAI V. SMT.HEENA AJAY PAREKH, MUMBAI

ITA 6471/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2090 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KUMAR PADMAPANI BORA
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY PARIKH
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6471/MUM/2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) I.T.O.-33(1)(5), C-12, 703, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BKC, MUMBAI- 400051. VS. HEENA. A. PARIKH, E-304, DHEERAJ PRESIDENCY, M.G. ROAD, OPP. SANSKRUTI BHAVAN, KANDIVALI (WEST), MUMBAI-400067. PAN/GIR NO.AKDPP 9648 L (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY SHRI KUMAR PADMAPANI BORA (SR.DR) ASSESSEE BY SHRI AJAY PARIKH DATE OF HEARING 04/12/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 06/12/2019 / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27/07/2018 OF LD. CIT(A)-45, MUMBAI FOR THE A.Y. 20 09-10 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT). 2. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PER USED. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF T HE LD. CIT(A) FOR UPHOLDING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASES TO T HE EXTENT OF 5.3%. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TA NO. 6471/MUM/2018 HEENA A PAREKH VS ITO 2 TRADING OF IRON AND STEEL. THE A.O. GOT INFORMATION REGARDING ASSESSEE BEING INVOLVED IN PURCHASE OF GOODS WITHOUT ACTUAL DELIVERY OF GOODS, ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT AND THEREAFTER THE A.O. MADE ADDITION OF RS . 18,35,824/- IN RESPECT OF BOGUS PURCHASES WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO 1 2.5% OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LD. CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 5.3% AFTER HAVING THE FOL LOWING OBSERVATION: 5.4 IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE A.O. HAS NOTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN PARA 3 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED A GROSS PROFIT OF 7.2% IN THE P&L ACCOUNT AND ADDED 12.5% OF THE BOGUS PURCHASES TO T HE INCOME DECLARED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE H ONBLE ITAT, MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S ROYAL ENTERPRISES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO APPLY THE DIFFERENTIAL PERCENTAGE OF 5.3% (12.5%-7. 2%) ON THE BOGUS PURCHASES OF RS. 1,46,86,682/-. IN OTHER WORDS RS. 7,78,394/- IS CONFIRMED OUT OF THE ADDITION OF RS. 18,35,824/-. ASSESSEE GETS PART RELIEF. THE GROUNDS OF APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 3. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE R EVENUE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECO RD AND FOUND THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. WAS DIRECTED TO BE UPHELD AT 5.3% BY THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE GP RATE DECLAR ED BY THE ASSESSEE AT 7.2%. I FOUND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED VA RIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS AND ACCORDINGLY WHATEVER G.P. HAS BE EN DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO BE REDUCED FROM THE AD DITION SO MADE BY TA NO. 6471/MUM/2018 HEENA A PAREKH VS ITO 3 THE A.O. NOTHING WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE L D DR SO AS TO PERSUADE ME TO DEVIATE FROM THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5.3% OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES . ACCORDINGLY, I UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH DECEMBER, 2019. SD/- (R.C.SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 06/12/2019 *RANJAN COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//