TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 561
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tes of assessment etc. can be summarised as under :- A.Y. ROI filed on Returned Income(Rs.) Assessment dt. Assessed Income(Rs.) Dt. of orders of CIT(A) 2010-11 24.09.2010 26,84,750/- 25.03.2013 66,14,720/- 17.11.2014 2011-12 24.09.2011 5,71,400/- 04.02.2014 16,42,560/- 17.11.2014 ITA/160/Mum/2015(2010-11)(By Revenue ): 2. First Ground of Appeal raised by the AO is about partial relief given with regard to bogus purchases. During the assessment proceedings the AO observed that he had received information from Investigation Wing that the assessee had obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs. 39.17 lakhs from hawala operators (Rs.14.92 lakhs-Aryan Sales Corpn., Rs. 11.17lakhs-M/s. Om Corpn. and Rs. 13.07 lakhs fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inting could not be carried out , that it had spent an amount of Rs. 29.19 lakhs for purchasing the toners only, the assessee had received printing charges from its customers, that the assessee had requested the AO to provide it an opportunity to cross examine the parties, that he did not afford any opportunity to it, copies of the bank statement of the persons were also not provided to the assessee, though the AO had relied upon the same evidence for making the addition, that it had furnished copies of ledger account during the assessment proceedings, that payment was made through Account Payee cheques, that copies of bank statement were also filed before AO, that the assessee had used the goods purchased by it for its business, that the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e find that the assessee had purchased goods from three parties that the sales tax authorities had made a reference to the Investigating Wing of the department, the AO had invoked the provisions of section 69C of the Act and had made an addition of Rs. 39.17 lakhs to the total income of the assessee. We find that the assessee had made a request to the AO to afford an opportunity to cross examine the persons whose statements had been relied upon to make the addition. Not giving a chance of cross examining the witnesses was violation of principles of natural justice. Addition made by the AO could be deleted only on that account. However even on merits, additions made is not sustainable. He had invoked the provisions of section 69C and the sai....