ITO-19(2)(3), MUMBAI V. MR. MILAN R PARIKH, MUMBAI

ITA 99/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8530 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHARM VEER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY R PARIKH
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI N.K.PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.99/MUM/2019(A.Y.2009-10) INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(2)(3), ...... APPELLANT ROOM NO.218, 2 ND FLOOR, MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO, MUMBAI -400 007 VS. MR.MILAN R.PARIKH, 17,PURAB APARTMENT, 42,B-4, KHER MARG, MUMBAI - 400 006. ..... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI DHARM VEER SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJAY R.PAR IKH DATE OF HEARING : 13/01/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/01/2020 ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: THIS APPEAL B Y THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-58, MUMBAI [ IN SHORT THE CIT( A) ] DATED 15/10/2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. SHRI SANJAY R.PARIKH APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS A TRADER IN DIAMONDS AND PRECIOUS STONE S. THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 WAS REOPENED ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE BOGUS PURCHASES FROM ONE OF THE CONCERNS( I.E. M/S. AMIT DIAMONDS) CONTROLLED AND MANAGED BY BHANWARLAL JAIN GROUP. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE 2 ITA NO.99/MUM/2019(A.Y.2009-10) HAD OBTAINED BOGUS PURCHASES BILLS TO THE TUNE OF R S.32,56,320/- FROM THE AFORESAID CONCERN LINKED WITH BHANWARLAL JAIN GROUP. THE A SSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF 12.5%(RS.4,07,040/-) OF THE ALLEGED NON-GENUINE PUR CHASES. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 06/02/2016 PASSED UNDER SEC TION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961( IN SHORT THE ACT), THE AS SESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) AFTER EXAMINING THE ENTIRE FACTUAL MATRI X AND VARIOUS DECISIONS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO 5% OF THE ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. THE ASSESSEE ACCEPTED THE SAME. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS WITHOUT ANY MERIT AND HENCE, THE SAME SH OULD BE DISMISSED. 3. PER CONTRA, SHRI DHARM VEER SINGH REPRESENTING THE DEPARTMENT VEHEMENTLY DEFENDED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND PRAYED FOR REVERS ING THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A). THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT ASSE SSEE HAS INDULGED IN PROCURING BOGUS PURCHASE BILLS FROM ONE OF THE CONCERNS OF BH AWARLAL JAIN GROUP. THE DEPARTMENT HAS MADE DETAILED INVESTIGATION AND HAS ESTABLISHED THAT BHANWARLAL JAIN GROUP IS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION EN TRIES WITH NO ACTUAL BUSINESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE A REASONABLE ADDITIO N OF 12.5% OF NON-GENUINE PURCHASES. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY RIVAL SIDE S AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER BY ESTI MATING G.P ON NON-GENUINE PURCHASES. THE CIT(A) POINTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ISSUED NOTICE TO THE ALLEGED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDERS BEFORE MA KING ADDITION AND RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO 5% OF THE ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION