ITO, PUNE V. YUSUF GULAMMOHAMMAD PATEL, PUNE

MA 46/PUN/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4815 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No.46/PUN/2021 (Arising out of ITA No.1852/PUN/2019 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITO, Ward- 6(4), Pune. Vs. Yusuf Gulmmohmmed Patel, Flat No.12, Madani Society, 30 Ghorpade Peth, Pune- 411042. PAN : AQTPP4209P Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This present Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the Department seeking restoration of appeal disposed of by this Tribunal in ITA No.1852/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 dated 30.01.2020 on the ground that the appeal was dismissed by this Tribunal on low tax effect even though it is covered by one of the exceptions prescribed in para 10 of the CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 and its amendment dated 20.08.2018. Revenue by : Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav Assessee by : None Date of hearing : 01.04.2022 Date of pronouncement : 07.04.2022 MA No.46/PUN/2021 2 2. The ld. CIT-DR submits that the impugned addition in the appeal on account of the bogus purchases made by the Assessing Officer. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A) while upholding the findings of the Assessing Officer that the purchases were made from Hawala traders had confirmed the addition only to the extent of gross profit @ 10% of such bogus purchases. 3. Being aggrieved by the decision of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue had filed the appeal before this Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 30.01.2020 dismissed the appeal on low tax effect. However, the Revenue is seeking the restoration of appeal on the ground that it is covered by one of the exceptions prescribed in para 10 of the CBDT Circular No.3 of 2018 (supra). 4. We have carefully gone through the submissions of the ld. CIT-DR. There is no dispute that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than the prescribed limit. However, the issue in the present Miscellaneous Petition is whether it is covered by any other exceptions enumerated vide CBDT Circular No.17/2019 [F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt)] dated 08th August, 2019 read with Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 and its amendment dated 20.08.2018 or not?. Undisputed position is that addition in the assessment was based on the information received from Sales MA No.46/PUN/2021 3 Tax Department. Information from the Sales Tax Department is not an information received from “the external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ED/DRI/SFIO/Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI)”. Therefore, exceptions enumerated vide clause (e) of para 10 of the said Instruction of CBDT Circular (supra) has no application to the present case. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the present Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced on this 07 th day of April, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 07 th April, 2022. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-8, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT-6, Pune. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.