2012 (6) TMI 825

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was framed wherein the Assessing Officer made various disallowances including the unexplained purchases and penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was also initiated. Against disallowance the assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) who after considering the submissions of the assessee partly allowed its appeal. Ld. CIT(A), while partly allowing the appeal, deleted the additions made on account of disallowance of water charges and restricted the disallowance on account of bogus purchase to the extent of 25%. While restricting the disallowance to the extent of 25% ld. CIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of M/s Vijay Proteins. The matter was further carried ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the ratio of decision in the case of C.I.T. (Addl.) vs. Smt. Chandrakanta reported in 205 ITR 607 (M.P.). 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and the judgments cited by the parties. We find that the Hon'ble Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, in the identical facts and circumstances, in the case of Yogeshwar Corporation vs. the ITO in ITA No.2836/Ahd/2007 has held as under:- "We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and the materials available on record. We find from the above undisputed facts that in the Assessment Year 1996-97 addition was made on account of bogus purchases of Rs. 3,54,598/- and on second appeal to the Tribunal addition was sustained....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essing Officer estimated and determined the income of the assessee and a penalty was levied. However, Ld. CIT(A) in the case in hand relied on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of C.I.T. (Addl.) vs. Smt. Chandrakanta reported in 205 ITR 607 (M.P.) in that case issue before the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh was whether the Tribunal was justified in canceling the penalty on the ground that income was determined on the basis of estimation. Hon'ble High Court observed and held as under:- "That being so, it is difficult to swallow that since the assessee's income was assessed on estimation basis, the assessee was not liable to any penalty. Instead, we find that the reason assigned by the Tribunal have no b....