ITO 24 (2)(3), MUMBAI V. SMT KETKI BHAVESH AJMERA, MUMBAI

ITA 7391/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3847 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY J SETHI
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , ! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . 7391 / / 2019 (%. 2009-10 ) ITA NO.7391/MUM/2019(A.Y 2009-10) INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(2)(3), ROOM NO.609, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, JEEJEEBHOY LANE, LALBAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI 400 012 ...... ' / APPELLANT % VS. SMT.KETKI BHAVESH AJMERA, 29C, 312, MANISH ROSE CHSL, J.P.ROAD, MANISH NAGAR, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI 400 053 PAN:ABLPA-9662-Q ..... ()/ RESPONDENT '*/ APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANJAY J. SETHI ()*/ RESPONDENT BY : NONE %+) / DATE OF HEARING : 19/07/2021 ,-. +) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/10/2021 / ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -36, MUMBAI [IN SHORT THE CIT(A)] DATED 20/09/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF CASE AS EMANATING FROM RECO RDS ARE : THE ASSESSEE IS A TRADER IN INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS. THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED ON THE BASIS OF INFOR MATION RECEIVED FROM DGIT (INVESTIGATION), MUMBAI. AS PER THE INFORMATION RE CEIVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS AGGREGATING TO RS.1,73,97,000 /- FROM FOLLOWING DEALERS, 2 ITA NO.7391/MUM/2019(A.Y 2009-10) DECLARED AS HAWALA OPERATORS BY THE SALES TAX DEPAR TMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA. NAME AMOUNT PURAB ENTERPRISES 80,89,875/- BHAKTI ENTERPRISES 93,07,125/- TOTAL 1,73,97,000/- DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AS SESSEE FAILED TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF AFORESAID DEALERS AND PURCHASES MA DE FROM THEM DURING THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THE AS SESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED SUPPRESSED PROFIT MARGIN ON BOGUS PURCHASES @ 12.5 0% AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.21,74,625/-. AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28/10/2016 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( IN SHORT ' THE ACT'), THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). IN THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE CIT(A) AF TER EXAMINING THE FACTS AND CONSIDERING SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE RESTRICTED PROFIT RATE ON BOGUS PURCHASES TO THE EXTENT OF DIFFERENTIAL PERCENTAGE AS DECLARED ON THE BOGUS PURCHASES AND AS DECLARED ON REGULAR PURCHASES. NOW, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE PART RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT(A). 3. SHRI SANJAY J. SETHI, REPRESENTING THE DEPARTME NT VEHEMENTLY DEFENDED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND PRAYED FOR RESTORING THE ADDIT ION ON BOGUS PURCHASES AS PER ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DISCHARGE HER ONUS IN PROVING GENUINENES S OF THE PURCHASES FROM THE DEALERS DECLARED AS HAWALA OPERATORS. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER IN A FAIR AND REASONABLE MANNER HAS ESTIMATED SUPPRESSED PROFIT MARGIN ON B OGUS PURCHASES AT 12.5%. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISTURBING THE SAME AND GRANTI NG RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE PRAYED FOR REVERSING THE FINDING OF CIT(A) AND UPHOLDING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3 ITA NO.7391/MUM/2019(A.Y 2009-10) 4. SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LD.DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE HEARD, ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW EXAMINED. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSE SSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE HER ONUS IN PROVING GENUINENESS OF THE DEALERS AND PURCHASES MADE FROM THEM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ESTIMATED SUPPRESSED PROFIT M ARGIN ON BOGUS PURCHASES AT 12.5%. IN THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE CIT( A) HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF DIFFERENTIAL PERCENTAGE AS DECLARED O N BOGUS PURCHASES AND AS DECLARED ON REGULAR PURCHASES. THE APPROACH ADOPTED BY THE CIT(A) IS ONE OF THE POSSIBLE VIEWS. THE IMPUGNED ORDER WARRANTS NO INTERFERENCE , HENCE, THE SAME IS UPHELD AND THE APPEAL BY REVENUE IS DISMISSED SANS-MERIT. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY THE 04TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021 SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / MUMBAI, 0%/ DATED 04/10/2021 VM , SR. PS (O/S) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPELLANT , 2. () / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 1) ( )/ THE CIT(A)- 4. 1) CIT 5. 23()% , . . . , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 34567 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI