TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 9
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment Year (AY)2008-09. In this case, several notices were given to the assessee but he has not turned up to pursue his appeals. 2. First we take up the Revenue's appeal in ITA No.2306/Ahd/2012 for A.Y.2008-09. The revenue has taken following grounds of appeal:- (i). The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,40,13,079/- out of total addition of Rs. 1,86,84,105/- made on account of bogus purchases. (ii). On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have upheld the entire addition of Rs. 1,86,84,105/- made on account of bogus purchases. (iii). The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 94,50,00/-made on account of une....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08 and 26/09/2008 he admitted that he had issued only bogus bills and had not made any delivery of goods. He stated that he received only cash commission for issuing bills. Copies of statements of the Shri Dharmendra J. Pandya, proprietor of M/s. Vishal Traders and of Shri Madanlal L. Shah were provided to the appellant by the Assessing Officer through letter dated 17/09/2010. The AO added Rs. 1,86,84,105/- as bogus purchases made from M/s. Vishal Traders. 7. Para 3.8 of the Assessment Order informs that the Assessing Officer through letter dated 08/10/2010 asked the assessee to produce suppliers and transporters. He asked the assessee to substantiate the claim of purchases by producing gate-pass, L.R. receipts, challans, vouchers etc. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ongs to quite ordinary family who possesses only one residential house of only 40 Sq. yards at Patan and one old motor cycle. 14. He further stated that statement u/s.131 recorded on oath on 22/09/2008, vide Question No.1 the appellant had specifically stated that he had done business at Market Yard, Harij only up to 31/03/2008 and at present, he is doing accounting work and his address is 111/B Chitrakut Nagar, B/h Gayatri Mandir, Patan. He further stated that the business has closed down on 31/03/2008. 15. He further stated that learned ACIT Central Cir.1, Ahmedabad had sent all the notices to Ganj Bazaar, Harij which were received back by ACIT Central Cir. 1(1) as unserved. Even the letter dated 08/10/2010 as per which an opportuni....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no supplying the copy of statement of Dharmendra Pandya and Madanlal recorded during the cross examination as on 15/10/2010, in spite of specific request made vide appellant's letter dtd. 22/11/2010. (iii.a). The learned CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the learned ACIT has treated the purchase made from M/s. Vishal Traders as Bogus purchases, only on the basis of controversial statement of Dharmendra Pandya and Madanlal recorded u/s. 131 of the Income-tax Act. (iii.b) The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of bogus purchases of Rs. 46,71,026/- @ 25% of the total purchases of Rs. 1,86,84,105/- from M/s. Vishal Traders, relying upon Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in the case of Sanjay Oil Cake Industri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of appeal:- (i). The learned CIT(A)-I, Ahmedabad grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming penalty of Rs. 15,76.438/- u/s. 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. (ii.a) The learned CIT(A)-I, Ahmedabad has erred in confirming the penalty levied by AO without satisfying the conditions precedent for applicability of Section 271(1)(c)and Explanation 1 to Section 271(1)(c). (ii.b) The learned CIT(A)-I, Ahmedabad has erred in not appreciating legally and factually the submissions and explanations of the appellant submitted during the course of the appellate proceedings. (ii.c) The learned CIT(A)-I, Ahmedabad has further erred in confirming penalty without having any cogent material or evidence from which it ....