SHREE KRISHNA ENGINEERING,HOWRAH V. I.T.O., WARD - 47(7), KOLKATA

ITA 2173/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shree Krishna Engineering, a firm, appealing against the order of the Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-12, Mumbai, which was passed for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The appeal was directed against the disallowance of Rs.1,35,557 added back to the total income of the assessee, which was treated as unexplained expenditure by the Assessing Officer. The disallowance was based on the finding that the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases of iron and steel. The Tribunal noted that neither the assessee nor any representative appeared to present any evidence during the proceedings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473198 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Bogus purchase; Accommodation entries; Bogus
• Section: 147; 142(1); 133A

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 2173/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Shree Krishna Engineering 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 2173/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shree Krishna Engineering,…………..………Appellant 27/1, Chowdhury Para 1st Bye Lane, Shibpur, Howrah-711104 [PAN:ABQFS7607C] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-47(7), Kolkata, 3, Government Place West, Kolkata-700001 Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: December 12, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order: December 30, 2024 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-12, Mumbai dated 6th August, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm. An information received from the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-4(2), Kolkata that one Shri Sanjiw Singh, son of Shri Kashinath Singh having office address at 109, Janarayan Babu Anand Dutta Lane, Howrah- ITA No. 2173/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Shree Krishna Engineering 2 711101, has been carrying on business of bogus billing and accommodation entries without actual sale of goods issuing mere bogus bills to the various persons. Thereafter a survey was conducted under section 133A of the Act at the premises of the above said address on 31.03.2016. A statement was recorded and it is seen from the statement of Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh that he admitted that he and his family members are the Directors of various Companies such as Tarama Ferrous & Non-Ferrous Trading Company Pvt. Limited, Rajputana Vanijya Private Limited, Durga Commodeal Pvt. Limited etc. These companies are merely paper companies having no actual business activities. He further stated that these companies are used for providing accommodation entries in the form of bogus billing, bogus share capital, unsecured loan, sale of shares etc. to the various beneficiaries/persons in view of the commission. Subsequently the case was reopened under section 147 on account of information received by DDIT (Inv.) according to the bogus purchase bills to the tax papers etc. In response to the said notice, the assessee produced the books of accounts under the relevant documents issued under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. The books of accounts of the assessee have been perused by the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee-firm had purchased Iron & Steel from different companies. The assessee- firm was asked to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases. The assessee furnished ledger accounts, invoice, delivery challans and bank statement, but no proof of transportation and lorry receipt was filed. The onus of proving the genuineness of the transaction of purchases lies with the assessee, but the assessee ITA No. 2173/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Shree Krishna Engineering 3 failed to substantiate the same. Since the genuineness of the transactions has been established, the ld. Assessing Officer treated the bogus purchases of Rs.1,35,557/- as unexplained and added back to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order of ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 3. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) after considering the submission of the assessee, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. None appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of receipt of the notices issued by the Tribunal. 5. I have heard the ld. D.R. It was the submission of the ld. D.R. that the assessee has not filed satisfactory evidence before the ld. Assessing officer as well as ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer treated the unexplained expenditure of Rs.1,35,557/- as disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. He further argued that the assessee neither before the ld. CIT(Appeals) nor before the ITAT filed any evidence to substantiate its claim. Therefore, in the absence of satisfactory evidence before any of the authorities, the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed. ITA No. 2173/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Shree Krishna Engineering 4 6. I have perused the material available on record and considered the facts narrated in the assessment order as well as reasons given by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). The main contention of the revenue authorities is that the assessee did not place any evidence to substantiate the expenditure claimed by the assessee. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer treated the expenditure as unexplained and the alleged claim of purchases of iron and steel for Rs.1,35,557/- is disallowed. Before me also, neither any one appeared on behalf of the assessee to substantiate its claim nor placed any documentary evidence to establish the purchases are genuine. Therefore, in the absence of satisfactory evidence, I am of the considered view that the assessee has not established the purchases of iron and steel for an amount of Rs.1,35,557/-, which was rightly disallowed by the ld. Assessing Officer and ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) rightly confirmed the order passed by him. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by both the revenue authorities. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/12/2024. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 30th day of December, 2024 Copies to :(1) Shree Krishna Engineering, 27/1, Chowdhury Para 1st Bye Lane, Shibpur, Howrah-711104 ITA No. 2173/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Shree Krishna Engineering 5 (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-47(7), Kolkata, 3, Government Place West, Kolkata-700001 (3) Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-12, Mumbai; (4) CIT - , Kolkata; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. "