MA NO. 217/MUM/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.40/MUM/2017 ANIL POPATLAL UDESHI ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.217/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.40/MUM/2017) ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) ANIL POPATLAL UDESHI SUDHA APARTMENT, 140, GF SHOP NO.1,VITALBHAI PATEL ROAD (INSIDE THE LANE MONPARA SWEETS & FARSON) KHOTA CHS WADI, GIRGAON MUMBAI - 400 004 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 19(1)(1) 2 ND FLOOR, MATRU MANDIR MUMBAI-400 007 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AAAPU-1762-D ( ! /APPELLANT ) : ( '#! / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHYAM C. AGRAWAL, LD. AR REVENUE BY : R. KAVITHA , LD. SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 31/08/2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31/08/2018 / O R D E R PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE AS SESSEE SEEKS THE AMENDMENT / RECALL OF TRIBUNAL ORDER ITA NO.40/MUM/ 2017 DATED 31/10/2017 WHICH IS AN EX-PARTE ORDER SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BENCH ON THE DATE OF HEARING DESP ITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. MA NO. 217/MUM/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.40/MUM/2017 ANIL POPATLAL UDESHI ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 2 2. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE [AR] FOR ASSE SSEE, SHRI. SHYAM C. AGRAWAL, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE THE HEARING NOTICES AND THEREFORE, NON-APPEARANCE WAS U NINTENTIONAL. THE LD. AR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED UNDER THE APPEAL WAS ESTIMATED ADDITIONS AGAINST ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES STATED TO BE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM 12 SUSPICIOUS PARTIES. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT LD. AO HAS ESTIMATED THE ADDITIONS AGAINST THE SAME @12.5% WHICH IS ON THE HIGHER SIDE KEEPING IN VIEW THE STATUS OF TH E ASSESSEE AND THE NATURE OF BUSINESS BEING CARRIED OUT BY HIM. THE AD DITIONS THUS ARRIVED AT BY LD. AO AMOUNTED TO RS.24.21 LACS WHICH HAS BE EN CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS THIS TRIBUNAL. IN THE ALTERNA TIVE, LD. AR PLEADED FOR REASONABLE ESTIMATION AGAINST THE SAME. THE LD. SR. DR, MS. R.KAVITA, SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONS WERE FAIR UNDER THE CI RCUMSTANCES AND THE ORDER REQUIRED NO INTERFERENCE. 3. FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE HEARING NOTICE WAS DULY ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ADDRESS PROVIDED BY HIM IN FORM NO.36 AND THE HEARING NOTICES HAVE ALSO NOT RETURNE D BACK. THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE, PRIMA FACIE, HAS REMAINED NEGLIGENT IN ATTENDING THE PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, THE C ONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE DO NOT JUSTIFY RECALLING OF THE ORDER. 4. HOWEVER, KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT THAT THE ASSES SEE WAS A RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL WITH MEAGRE TURNOVER, WE REDUCE THE ADDITION TO 8% OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES OF RS.1,93,68,783/-. RESULTANTLY, THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS STANDS REDUCED TO RS.15,49,502/-. THE EAR LIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL STAND MODIFIED TO THAT EXTENT. THE LD. AO IS DIRECTED TO RE- MA NO. 217/MUM/2018 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.40/MUM/2017 ANIL POPATLAL UDESHI ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 3 COMPUTE THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY REDUCING THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS TO RS.15,49,502/-. 5. RESULTANTLY, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION STAND PARTLY ALLOWED IN TERMS OF OUR ABOVE ORDER. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST AUGUST, 2018 SD/- SD/- ( JOGINDER SINGH ) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGAR WAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 31.08.2018 SR.PS:- THIRUMALESH ! / 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 FILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI