PRIME ENGINEERS & ESSVEE ENTERPRISES (JV), MUMBAI V. ACIT 21(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7512/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8133 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AARJU GARODIA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA N O. 7512/MUM/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011 12 ) M/S. PRIME ENGINEERS & ESSVEE ENTERPRISES (JV) A 204, GOKUL ARCADE SWAMI NITYANAND MARG VILE PARLE (E) MUMBAI 400 057 PAN: AAJFP2861R . APPELLANT V/S ACIT 21(1), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MS. AARJU GARODIA DATE OF HEARING 13/12/2017 DATE OF ORDER 15.12.2017 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 08/09/2016 OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 37, MUMBAI FOR THE A.Y.2011 12. 2 ITA NO.7512/MUM/2016 M/S. PRIME ENGINEERS & ESSVEE ENTERPRISES(JV) 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE , THE ASSESSEE A PARTNERSHIP FIRM FILE D ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 25/09/2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS .42,36,900/ . DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS , THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM SALES TAX DEPARTMENT FOUND THAT PURCHASES AMOUNTING TO RS .9,47,745/ MADE FROM REAL TRADERS IS NOT GENUINE AS THE CONCERNED PARTY HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED TO BE A HAWALA OPERATOR PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION BILLS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED BACK AN AMOUNT OF RS .9,47,745/ . FURTHER , IN COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS , THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFYING THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE MADE ENQUIRIES DURING WHICH WE FOUND THAT SHREEJI TRADING CO., FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE MADE PURCHASES OF RS .11,47,152/ DID NOT PROVIDE DETAILS IN COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION.133(6). ACCORDINGLY, HE ADDED BACK THE AMOUNT OF RS .11,47,152/ BY TREATING THE PURCHASE AS NON GENUINE. FURTHER, WHILE VERIFYING THE GENUINENESS OF UNSECURED LOAN OF RS .2,47 ,43,889/ THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT LOAN OF RS .65,73,196/ WAS ADVANCED BY M/S. PARAMOUNT INFRA PROJECTS, HOWEVER, WHILE VERIFYING THE RETURN 3 ITA NO.7512/MUM/2016 M/S. PRIME ENGINEERS & ESSVEE ENTERPRISES(JV) OF INCOME OF THE SAID CREDITOR IT WAS FOUND THAT IT HAS LOSS OF RS .20,21,705/ DURING THE YEAR AND HAD NO C APITAL OR RESERVE TO ADVANCE THE LOAN. ACCORDINGLY, HE ADDED BACK THE AMOUNT OF RS .65,73,196/ TREATING IT AS NON GENUINE. 3. AGAINST THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 4. AS IT A PPEARS , BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR AND REPEATEDLY SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE .T HEREFORE, LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF ASSESSEES APPEAL EX PARTE CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS M ADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE. IT IS SEEN FROM RECORD , ON EARLIER OCCASIONS WHEN THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING, NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSES SEE . THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AS WELL AS BEFORE US, CLEARLY INDICATE THAT IT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL. THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX PART E QUA THE ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4 ITA NO.7512/MUM/2016 M/S. PRIME ENGINEERS & ESSVEE ENTERPRISES(JV) 6. HEARD LD . D EPARTMENTAL R EPRESENTAT I VE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AS COULD BE SEEN, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE COUPLE OF ADD ITIONS, TREATING THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO BE NON GENUINE. THAT APART, HE HAS ALSO TREATED UNSECURED LOAN OF RS .65,73,196/ FROM M/S. PARAMOUNT INFRA PROJECTS AS NON GENUINE SINCE , THE SAID PARTY LACKED CREDITWORTHINESS. NEITHER BEFORE THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES, NOR BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE EITHER THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES OR GENUINENESS OF THE UNSECURED LOAN. THEREFORE, IN ABSENCE OF COGE NT EVIDENCE, WE ARE UNABLE TO DISTURB THE FINDING OF THE D EPARTMENTAL A UTHORITIES IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITION S MADE. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). GROUNDS RAISED ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.12.2017 SD/ - SD/ - SD/ - N.K. PRADHAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; 5 ITA NO.7512/MUM/2016 M/S. PRIME ENGINEERS & ESSVEE ENTERPRISES(JV) (5) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER KARUNA SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI