ITO 24(2)(5), MUMBAI V. MITESH ASHOK MEHTA, MUMBAI

ITA 6541/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0122 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IN
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Unexplained expenditure; Tangible material; Accommodation entries
• Section: 69C; 143(3); 115JB; 133(6); 148; 10

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA NO S . 6591, 6592 AND 6593 / MUM/ 20 1 6 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2009 - 10 TO 2 0 1 1 - 12 ) JAYKUMAR RAMANLAL SHAH SANDHYA RAG BUILDING, A - 3, GROUND FLOOR, AGRA ROAD, KALYAN (W) - 421301 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 3( 5), 2 ND FLOOR, RANI MANSION, NEAR SBI, MURBAD, KALYAN(W) - 421301 PAN :BAJPS5220C ( / APPELLANT) : ( / RESPONDE NT ) ITA NO. 6959 / MUM/ 201 6 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 09 - 10 ) ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13(3)(1), R NO.229, 2 ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 / VS. REMI PROCESS PLANT AND MACHINERY LIMITED, PLOT NO.11, CAMA IND USTRIAL ESTATE, GOREGAON (E), MUMBAI - 400063 ( / APPELLANT) : ( / RESPONDENT ) CROSS - OBJECTION NO.154/MUM/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 6959/ MUM/ 2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2009 - 10 ) REMI PROCESS PLANT AND MACHINERY LI MITED, PLOT NO.11, CAMA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, GOREGAON (E), MUMBAI - 400063 / VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13(3)(1), R NO.229, 2 ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 ./ PAN : AAACRO409H 2 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 ( / APPELLANT) : ( / RESPONDENT ) ITA NO. 6541 TO 6543/ MUM/ 2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 10 - 11,2011 - 12 AND 2012 - 13 ) INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(2)(5), R NO. 611, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, 6 TH FLOOR, LALBAUG, MUMBAI - 400012 / VS. SHRI MITESH ASHOK MEHTA, B/7, RD FLOOR, ADITYA APARTMENTS DR.S R MARG, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI - 400069 PAN: AFUPM1401R ( / APPELLANT) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / ASSESSEE BY : IN ITA NOS.6591 TO 6593/M/16 NONE IN CO 154/M/17 SHRI BHAGIRTH SINGH ITA NO.6541 T O 6542/MUM/16 NONE / REVENUE BY : IN ITA NOS.6591 TO 6593/M/16 , ITA NO.6959/MUM/16 , ITA NO.6541 TO 654 3 /MUM/16 SHRI PURUSHOTTAM K UMAR / DATE OF HEARING : 17.8.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28. 8 . 201 7 / O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: APPEALS BEARING ITA NOS.6591 TO 6593/M/2016 ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) DATED 23.8.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011 - 12,2009 - 10 AND 2009 - 10. 3 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 APPEAL NO.6959/M/2016 BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS - OBJECTION THERETO BY THE ASSESSEE IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 24.8.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. APPEALS BEARING ITA NOS.6541 TO 6543/M/17 HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY T HE CIT(A) DATED 30.8.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11 TO 2013 - 13. SINCE ISSUE INVOLVED IN A LL THESE APPEALS PERTAIN S TO THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASE S , THEREFORE THESE APPEALS A RE CLUBBED TOGETHER, HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. IN APPEALS NO. 6591 TO 6593/M/2016 AND ITA NOS. 6541 TO 6543 /MUM/2016, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE N OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WHEN THE APPEALS WERE CALLED FOR HEARING NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEARING WAS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE TRIBUNAL DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE THROUGH RPAD. THEREFORE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. ITA NO.6591/MUM/2016 (A Y - 2011 - 12) 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE 4 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 AO REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT AFTER RECEIPT OF INFORMATION FROM DGIT(INV), PUNE TO THE EFFECT THAT THE SALES TA X DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA HAS UNEARTHED A RACKET INVOLVING MORE THAN 1935 HAWALA DEALERS ENGAGED IN ISSUING BOGUS INVOICES OF PURCHASES OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE WA S ONE OF THE BENEFICIAR IES. ACCORDINGLY , THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS R EOPENED U/S 148 OF THE ACT AND THE AO ,DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE PURCHASES WORTH RS.1,82,36,619/ - FROM 11 PARTIES AS STATED AT PAGES 1 AND 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER . DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE A SSESSEE SUBMITTED THE DELIVERY CHALLANS, XEROX COPIES OF THE BILLS, TRANSPORTATION AND OCTROI PAYMENTS RECEIPTS IN RESPECT OF THE SAID TRANSACTIONS. THE AO ALSO ISSUED NOTICES U/S 133(6) TO THE VARIOUS SUPPLIERS BUT THE SAME WERE RETURNED UNSERVED. FIN ALLY AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS CONTENTIONS AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND REJECT ED THE SAME . FINALLY THE AO DISALLOWED AND ADDED A SUM OF RS.1,82,36,61 9 / - REL A TING TO BOGUS PURCHASES TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY ASSESS ING INCOME AT RS .1,89,01,350/ - VIDE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT. 5 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 2.1 IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD.CIT(A) UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO PASSED U/S 148 OF THE ACT BY OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER : 8. THEREFORE, THE APPELLANTS CONTENTION THAT THE AO DID NOT HAVE ANY TANGIBLE MATERIAL AND THE CASE WAS REOPENED MERELY ON SUSPICION , IS WITHOUT ANY MERIT BECAUSE THE AO HAD TANGIBLE AND SPECIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT APPELLANTS TRANSACTIONS WITH HAWALA DEALERS AMOUNTING TO RS.59,90,798/ - THEREFOR E , VERY SPECIFIC AND RELEVANT INFORMATION HAVING LIVE LINK TO THE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME WAS AVAILABLE WITH T HE AO. IT IS THEREFORE, HELD THAT THE AO HAD REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF T HE APPELLANT BASED ON TANGIBLE AND SPECIFIC INFORMATION IN HIS POSSESSION WHICH HAD LIVE LINK TO THE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME AN D THEREFORE, THE REOPENING O F T HE ASSESSMENT IN THE APPELLANTS CA S E WAS IN ACCORDANCE W ITH LAW . THEREFORE , THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED 2.2 . WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE CON TENTIONS OF LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US INCLUDING THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED ON THE RECEIPT OF INFORMATION FROM THE DGIT(INV) MUMBAI AND AS PER THE INFORMATION FROM THE SA LES TAX DEPARTMENT, GOM T HAT THE ASSESSEE AVAILED SOME ENTRIES OF BOGUS PURCHASES FROM THE HAWALA DEALERS. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE US TO CONTROVERT THE FINDING OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND THEREFORE WE ARE INCLINED T O UPHOLD T H E FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) THAT THE CASE OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS RIGHTLY REOPENED. ACCORDINGLY, 6 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUE OF REOPENING OF T HE ASSESSMENT STANDS DISMISSED. 3 . THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,82,36,619/ - BY THE LD.CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES . 3.1 THE FACT S BEING THE SAME IN GROUND NO.1 AS STATED HEREINABOVE . T HE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION @ 16% OF THE TOTAL BOGUS PURCHA SE S BY HOLDING THAT THE GP OF PREVIOUS TWO YEARS WAS 16% BY RELYING ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S SIMITH P SHETH, 356 ITR 451 (GUJ) AND THUS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THE TUNE OF RS.29,17,859/ - . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), THE ASSE SSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3.2 . THE LD. DR REITERATED THE FACTS AS STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 3.3 . AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND ON PERUSAL OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A VAIL ED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES FOR B OGUS PURCHASE S FROM VARIOUS HAWALA DEALERS AS POINTED OUT AND PUBLISHED BY THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT OF GOM . WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE S TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASE S AND EVEN THE NOTICE SENT U/S 133( 6) OF THE 7 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 ACT WERE RETURNED UNSERVED BUT SIMULTANEOUSLY , WE FIND THAT THE AO HAS NOT DOUBTED THE SALES OUT OF MATERIALS PURCHASE D BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THESE HAWALA OPERATORS WHICH MEANS THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED THE MATERIAL FROM THE GRAY MARKET THERE BY MAKING SAV INGS OF TAXES LIKE VAT OCTROI ETC . T HESE PURCHASES AND SALES WERE DULY RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE . T HE CO - ORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN SIMILAR CASES HA VE BEEN TAKING A CONSISTENT VIEW IN SUCH CASES BY UPHO LDING THE DISALLOWANCE @ 12.5% OF SUCH UNVERIFIED PURCHASES TOWARDS VARIOUS SAVINGS AND LEAKAGES OF REVENUE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). THE AO IS DIRECTED TO APPLY 12.5% ON THE A LLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. 3.4 . RESULTANTLY, ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ITA NOS.6592 AND 6593/MUM/2016 4 . ON IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES , WE HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THE ISSUE BY PARTLY ALLOW ING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ITA NO.6591/MUM/2016. THE FACTS BEING THE SAME, THE FINDINGS OF ITA NO. 6591/MUM/2016 WOULD , MUTATIS MUTATIS , APPLY TO THESE APPEALS AS WELL. THE AO IS DIRECTED ACCORDINGLY. 4.1 . IN THE RESULTS ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 8 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 ITA NO.6959/MUM/2016 5 . THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.38,53,857/ - BY THE LD.CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 5.1 . FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 29.9.2009 D ECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.2,00,62,791/ - UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISION S OF THE ACT AND RS.1,24,69,409/ - UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT. THE RETURN WAS REVISED SUBSEQUENTLY . T HE AO , AFTER RECEIVING INF ORMATION THE FROM THE SALE S TA X DEPARTMENT, GOM THAT THE ASSESSEE WA S ONE OF T HE B ENEFICIAR IES OF THE HAWALA DEALERS WHO ARE PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES , THE AO RE - OPENED THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT ON 19.3.2014 . THE COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTIC E ISSUED U/S 148 WAS MADE ON 28.4.2014 REQUEST ING THE AO TO TREAT THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 31.3.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 AS IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT . DURING PROCEEDINGS U/S 148 OF THE ACT, THE AO CALLED UPON THE ASSESSE E TO PRODUCE THE DETAILS OF THESE PURCHASE S AS MENTIONED IN PARA 2 AT PAGES 2 AND 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FROM VARIOUS PARTIES AGGREGATING TO RS.38,53,857/ - . BEFORE THE AO, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT M/S SHREE 9 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 SUNDHA STEEL PVT LTD HAS NOT BEEN DECL ARED HAWALA DEALERS BY THE GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA AND THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED STEEL PLATES WHICH WERE CONSUMED IN THE MANUFACTUR ING OF GOODS BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO FILED VARIOUS EVIDENCE S IN RESPECT THEREOF. THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE TREATED ALL THE PARTIES AS HAWALA OPERATOR AND AS A RESULT THE ENTIRE PURCHASE OF RS.38,53,857/ - WERE ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY REJECT ING THE CONENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE . THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION VIDE P ARA 5.3.3 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER BY OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER : 5.3.3 IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE APPELLANT HAD PROVIDED AMPLE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH PURCHASE AS GENUINE . THE AO HAS REJECTED THE SAME ON MERE SUSPICION, WITHOUT BRINGING ANY FINDINGS OF FACTS ON RECORD. SUSPICION OF THE HIGHEST ORDER CANNOT TAKE PLACE OF EVIDENCE. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF JUDGMENTS CITED ABOVE, ADDITION OF RS.38,53,857/ - AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C IS DELETED. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLO WED 5. 2 . AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUS ING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SPECIFICALLY SUBMITTED TO THE AO THAT M/S SHREE SUNDHA STEEL PVT LTD FROM WHOM THE PURCHASES OF RS.25,96,500/ - WERE MADE WAS NOT DE C LARED A HAWALA DEALER BY THE VAT DEPTT GOM AND THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS WERE ALSO FILED BEFORE THE AO . T HE AO , WITHOUT MAKING ANY OBSERV ATIONS ON THE SAID SUBMISSIONS ADDED 10 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 THE ENTIRE PURCHASE OF RS. 25,96,500 FROM THE SAID SUPPLIER BESIDES MAKING ADDITI ONS QUA THE PURCHASES FROM 5 OTHER HAWALA SUPPLIERS. THE LD.CIT(A) DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION BY UPHOLDING THAT THE AS SESS EE HAS FILED NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND EVIDENCES TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF PURCHASE . AFTER EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE S ON RECORD, WE FI N D THA T THE PURCHASE S FROM M/S SHREE SUNDHA STEEL PVT LTD AMOUNTING TO RS.25,96,500/ - WERE RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE CIT(A) AS THE SAID PARTY WAS NOT HAWALA DEALER AND THE AO HAS NOT RECORDED ANY FINDINGS AGAINST M/S SHREE SUNDHA STEEL PVT LTD BEING HAWAL A DEALER WHEN THE ASSESSEE SPECIFICALLY SUBMITTED IN THAT CONTEXT DURING RE - ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BY WAY OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS . HOWEVER,I N RESPECT OF THE REMAINING PARTIES , A REASONABLE DISALLOWANCE AT THE RATE OF 12.5% OF T HE TOTAL PURCHASE SHOULD BE MADE TOWARDS VARIOUS SAVINGS OF TAXES AND OTHER LEVIES WHICH THE ASSESSEE MAY HAVE MADE BY MAKING T HE PURCHASES FROM THE GRAY MARKE T . THEREFORE , WE DIRECT THE AO TO APPLY 12.5% OF THE BOGUS PURCHASES FROM REMAINING FIVE PARTIES WHO WERE DECLARED HAWALA DEALERS FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE HA VE PURCHASED MATERIAL TO THE TUNE OF RS. 12,57,357/ - . THE AO IS DIRECTED TO MAKE ADDITION @12.5% OF RS. 12,57,357/ - . ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLO WED . RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 11 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 CROSS - OBJECTION NO.154/MUM/2017 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.6959/MUM/2016 ) 6 . THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE IN SUPPORT OF CIT(A) ORDER. SINCE WE HAVE PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, THE CROSS - OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. ITA NO.6541/MUM/2016 7 . THE SOLE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE RESTRICTION OF ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 16% OF THE TOTAL PURCHASES FROM HAWALA DEALERS BY CIT(A) AS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE OF 1 00% OF THE BOGUS PURCHASES BY THE AO . 7.1 . FACTS OF T HE CASE ARE TH AT ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 12.10.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.5,19,310 / - . THE ASSE SS MENT WAS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 8.3.2015 AT AN INCOME OF RS.43,64,873/ - . THEREAFTER THE AO RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THE DGIT(INV), MUMBAI THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED CERTAIN ENTRIES OF BOGUS PURCHASES FROM THE VARIOUS HAWALA DEALERS AS DECLARED BY THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT , GOM AND CONSEQUENTLY THE AS SESSMENT WAS REOPENED U/S 148 ISSUED ON 08.05.2014. T HE AO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY THESE PURCHASE SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS BOGUS 12 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 PURCHA S ES . THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION S AND SUBMISSIONS AND VARIOUS CONTENTIONS RAIS ED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, DISALLOWED THE PURCHASES TO THE TUNE OF RS.57,90,015/ - FROM CHETAN CHEMICAL CORPORATION . IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD.CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY RESTRICT ING THE ADDITION TO RS.9,26,402/ - BEING 16% OF TOTAL PURCHASES OF RS.57,90,015/ - BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF PREDECESSOR IN APPEAL NO.CIT(A) - 31/IT - 155/ITO - 20(2)/13 - 14 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 DATED 10.2.2015. 7.2 . AFTER HEARING THE LD.DR AND ON PERUSAL OF THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US, WE F IND THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS PASSED ORDER IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO AFTER CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS CONTENTION AND SUBMISSIONS AS MADE BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND AFTER FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HIS PREDECESSOR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11. IN THE PR ESENT CASE GP APPLIED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS QUITE REASONABLE UNDER THE PRESENT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS THE AO HAS NOT DOUBTED THE SALES OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PRODUCED STOCK REGISTER , BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND STOCK REGIST ER IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE AO . IN OUR OPINION THE LD.CIT(A) HAS PASSED A VERY REASON ABLE ORDER BY PARTLY SUSTAINING THE ADDITION T O THE TUNE OF RS.9,26,402/ - BY DIRECTING ADDITION @ 16% OF THE 13 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 BOGUS PURCHASES . IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 7.3 . RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.6542 AND 6543/MUM/2016 SINCE, WE HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE RE VENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 AND FACTS BEING THE SAME AND FOLLOWING OUR DECISION IN ITA NO.6541/MUM/2016, WE DISMISS THESE APPEALS AS WELL. 8 . RESULTANTLY, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 9 . IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSE SSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009 - 10 TO 2011 - 12 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED, APPEAL S OF THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 ARE DISMISSED AND THE CROSS - OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED AND THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE BEARING ITA NO.6541 TO 6543/M/2016 ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28TH AUG , 2017. S D SD ( MAHAVIR SINGH ) (RAJESH KUMAR) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 28. 8 .2017 SRL,SR.PS 14 ITA NO. 6591 /MUM/201 6 AND OTHER 6 APPEALS AND CO 154/M/17 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F ILE / BY ORDER, T RUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI