2016 (1) TMI 645

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng officer on expenses relating to "tools and consumables machinery repair and packing expenses‟. 2. That the ld CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in holding that the assessee has proved the identity of the creditor and genuineness of the purchases made from M/s. R. K. Enterprises and M/s. Vasu Trading Corporation." 2. The facts in brief of the case are that the assessee company was engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of forgings, Iron and steel in form of billets and blooms were purchased and with forge hammers same were converted into flanges primarily used in pipelines. In addition to company also carried out job work in respect of forging. The assessee company filed return of incom....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rties should not lead to conclusion that purchases from these parties were not genuine. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer noted that purchase made from M/s. R.K. Enterprise as well as from M/s. Shri Vasu Trading Corporation were not of raw material used for manufacturing of forging and therefore were not part of excise records, therefore argument of high yield on account of these purchase and acceptance of manufacturing records by excise authority is of no relevance. All the items claimed to have been purchased were for machinery repairs, tools, consumables, and packing material. Further, he observed that no genuine business entities existed. The assessee procured mere bills from some person engaged in providing bills in name of s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....harged the onus of the [purchases made and in absence of any contrary evidence in possession of AO despite 133(6) notices not served on the parties no disallowance can be made on account of bogus purchases. Aggrieved the revenue is before us in this appeal. 5. Ld DR reiterated the findings of the AO and submitted that in absence of 133(6) notices served on the sellers the AO has rightly treated purchases made as bogus. 6. Ld AR of the appellant submitted the same arguments which were advanced before CIT (A) and he submitted that the assessee has discharged its onus fully and AO has made disallowance without any basis. Therefore CIT (A) has deleted the disallowance correctly. 7. We have heard the parties and perused the orders of lower au....