MANISH GOYAL,GWALIOR V. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWL, GWALIOR

ITA 520/AGR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the assessee, Shri Manish Goyal, against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2011-12. The primary issues in the appeals were the additions made under section 68 for unsecured loans and the disallowance of purchases deemed as bogus. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence in the form of PAN details and confirmations from lenders for the unsecured loans, which were not adequately challenged by the lower authorities. In the second appeal, regarding the alleged bogus purchases, the Tribunal acknowledged the unique circumstances of the assessee's business operations, which involved emergency purchases from local suppliers, leading to discrepancies in records.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 38840 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAILENDER SHRIVASTAVA LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: S.C. JAIN LD
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 2

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.519/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.520/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Manish Goyal 228 B&C, Patel Nagar City Center, Gwalior 474011 बनाम/ Vs. DCIT / ACIT 1(1) Gwalior ̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ACDPG-2015-J (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri S.C.Jain (CA) – Ld. AR ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2009- 10 & 2011-12 arise out of separate orders of first appellate authority. The registry has noted delay of 11 days in the appeals which stand condoned. First, we take up appeal for AY 2009-10 which arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 13-09-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by 2 Ld. AO u/s 143(3) of the act on 13-12-2011. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of unsecured loans for Rs.23.03 Lacs. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the same is adjudicated as under. 2. The assessee obtained loans of Rs.27.33 Lacs from various parties as detailed in para-12 of the impugned order. The assessee did not submit bank statements with respect to loans of Rs.23.03 Lacs and accordingly, the same was added u/s 68. The addition was confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be ascertained that the assessee furnished PAN and confirmation of the lenders in support of receipt of loans. The lower authorities merely rejected the same for want of bank statements. However, without any independent enquiry, such loans could not be doubted once the assessee had furnished PAN details and confirmation of the lenders. Therefore, this addition is not sustainable. We order so. The appeal stand allowed. 4. In AY 2011-12, the only ground as urged by Ld. AR is addition of alleged bogus purchases for Rs.32.54 Lacs. The reasons for the same are tabulated at para-7 of the impugned order. Upon perusal of the same, it could be seen that the purchases has been disallowed against certain creditors due to discrepancies in ledger balances. Few parties have denied supplies to the assessee. From assessee’s replies, it could be ascertained that all such purchases are made by local traders / villagers and the purchase bills are submitted to the assessee for 3 reimbursement. The discrepancy arises due to the fact that civil contract works of the assessee is executed by outstationed staff with no direct control of the assessee. Owning to exigency of work, the material is stated to have been purchased by staff on spot at short notices from local suppliers who are not the regular dealers but they supply material in emergency. The local suppliers do not have their own material but they have links with other dealers from whom they procure the material and make supplies to the assessee which result into discrepancy into ledger accounts. Considering the nature of assessee’s business, this explanation could be accepted to a certain extent. Accordingly, we direct Ld. AO to restrict the impugned additions to the extent of 10% of impugned disallowance of Rs.32.54 Lacs. The Ld. AO is directed to re-compute the income of the assessee. The corresponding grounds as well as the appeal stand partly allowed. 5. The appeal ITA No.519/Agr/2024 stand allowed whereas ITA No.520/Agr/2024 stand partly allowed. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟ /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28-03-2025 4 आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT AGRA "