2014 (5) TMI 191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....king adjournment of the case was filed. On the earlier date of hearing on 12/2/2014 also none appeared on behalf of the assessee. In these circumstances, we proceed to decide the appeals preferred by the Revenue and the COs. preferred by the assessee exparte qua the assessee on merit, after hearing the learned DR. 3. The identical grounds of these three appeals of the Revenue are as under: "1. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.4,06,852/- (A.Y.2007-08), Rs.33,89,890 (A.Y.2008-09) and Rs.3,69,815 (A.Y.2009-10) made on account of commission income for arranging bogus bills. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have upheld the entire addition of Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the bill amount. He submitted that the CIT(A) was not justified in restricting the addition on account of commission income at 1% of the total amount against 2% estimated by the AO. He relied on the order of the AO. 5. We have considered submissions of the learned DR and have perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A). We find that the assessee was in the activity of arranging bogus bills for certain parties, and he has also admitted this fact in his statement given to the department. It is further corroborated with the statement recorded by the Department of Shri Dharmendra Pandya, proprietor of Vishal Traders. The assessee is an individual and was not filing any return of income claiming that he has no taxable income. The claim of ....