MIHIR OVERSEAS, MUMBAI V. ITO 24(1)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 6809/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8298 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN KUMARSR
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

, INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL -BBENCH MUMBAI , , , BEFORE S/SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A./6809/MUM/2016 , / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 M/S. MIHIR OVERSEAS PROP. HEMANT BILAKHIA A-502, GODS GRACE, ADARSH DUGDHALAY COLONY, OFF MARVE RD., MALAD (W), MUMBAI-400 064. PAN:AAJPB 4335 J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 30( 1)(4) MUMBAI. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY: SHRI SUMAN KUMAR-SR. DR ASSESSEE BY: NONE / DATE OF HEARING: 28/11/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:28/11/2017 , 1961 254(1) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) , . . . . . . . . / PER B.R. BASKARAN, AM - THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 11.07.2016 PASSED BY LD CIT(A)-41, MUMBAI IN PARTIA LLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION RELATING TO ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES MADE I N AY 2008-09. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, EVEN THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT BY REGISTERED POST. HENCE WE PROCEED TO DISPO SE OF THE APPEAL, EX- PARTE, WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HEARD LD D.R AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE IS A MANUFACTURER CUM TRADER OF PAPER STICKERS AND OTHER PACKING MATERIALS. CONSEQUENT TO THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE SAL ES TAX DEPARTMENT, IT CAME TO THE NOTICE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PURCHASES TO THE TUNE OF RS.51,20,538/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER CO NSIDERATION FROM THE PARTIES, WHO WERE LISTED OUT BY THE SALES TAX DEPAR TMENT AS HAWALA DEALERS, I.E., THEY PROVIDED ONLY ACCOMMODATION BILLS WITHOU T ACTUALLY SUPPLYING THE MATERIAL. THE AO ISSUED NOTICES U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT TO THE SUPPLIERS, BUT THEY WERE RETURNED BACK UN-SERVED. THE ASSESSEE AL SO COULD NOT PRODUCE 6809/M/16 M/S. MIHIR OVERSEAS 2 PARTIES BEFORE THE AO. HENCE THE AO TREATED THE AB OVE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.51,20,538/- AS BOGUS PURCHASES AND DISALLOWED TH E SAME. 3. BEFORE LD CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED QUA NTITY DETAILS AND OTHER EVIDENCES AVAILABLE WITH HIM. THE LD CIT(A) NOTICE D THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROVE THE TRANSPORT OF MATERIALS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE ADDITION OF ENTIRE AMOUNT OF PURCHASE S IS NOT JUSTIFIED, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS RECONCILED PURCHASES WITH SALES. ACCORDINGLY, BY TAKING CUE FROM THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE GUJARAT H IGH COURT IN THE CASES OF VIJAY PROTEINS LTD (2015)(58 TAXMANN.COM 44) AND CIT VS. SIMIT P SHETH (2013)(356 ITR 451), THE LD CIT(A) THAT A PORTION O F PURCHASES MAY BE SUSTAINED. ACCORDINGLY THE LD CIT(A) SUSTAINED ADD ITION TO THE EXTENT OF 30% OF VALUE OF PURCHASES, WHICH WORKED OUT TO RS.1 5,36,161/-. STILL AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL. 4. THE LD D.R STRONGLY CONTENDED THAT THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE, SINCE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUT HORITY HAS TAKEN REASONABLE VIEW OF THE MATTER. 5. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS NOTICED THA T THE ASSESSEE ITSELF WAS DECLARING G.P RATE OF 17.23% AND THERE IS POSSIBILI TY OF MAKING FURTHER PROFIT IN PURCHASING THE GOODS FROM GREY MARKET. ACCORDIN GLY HE HAS ESTIMATED THE PROFIT FROM THESE ALLEGED PURCHASES AT 30%. BE FORE US, NO MATERIAL WAS PLACED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO COMPEL US TO INT ERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A). HENCE WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTION , BUT TO CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY HIM. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IS DISMISSED. ! . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH NOVEMBER, 2017. SD/- SD /- ( / RAM LAL NEGI ) ( / B.R. BASKARAN ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 6809/M/16 M/S. MIHIR OVERSEAS 3 MUMBAI; ' /DATED :28.11.2017. JV.SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI.