2017 (9) TMI 1215

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 2. Effective ground of appeal is about allowing a relief of Rs. 40, 66, 726/-to the assessee for the alleged bogus purchases. During the assessment proceedings, the AO received information from the Sales Tax Authorities that the assessee had obtained bogus bills from Unique Enter - prises(Rs.11.21 lakhs), Shreyas Marketing Agency (12.70 lakhs), Shri Ganesh Trading Co. (Rs.12.63 lakhs), Krishi Enterprises(4.27 lakhs), Sunder Corporation (5.65 lakhs), that it had not received any goods from the suppliers. He directed the assessee to produce sufficient evidence and establish the genuineness of the transaction. After considering the submission of the assessee, he held that there was no proof/evidence that goods purchased from the above five....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee had produced documentary evidences like copy of invoices and Ledger accounts of the vendor's in its books of accounts regarding the purchases to substantiate the genuineness of the transactions, that the AO could not deny that purchases were not made at all and that material was not used for the business, that what was under dispute was the purchases from the parties from bills had been taken and the cheques had been issued, that purchaseswere not in dispute but the parties from whom purchases were shown to have been made were suspicious, that the information received from the sales tax Department was a goodly for making further investigation, that the AO did not make any investigation and completed the assessment on suspicion, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ents of the alleged hawala dealers were never supplied to the assessee, that the payments were made through banking channel, that the AO had not doubted the sales.. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that the assessee had purchased goods from five parties mentioned in paragraph two, that he had held that suppliers were indulged in issuing bogus bills without supplying the goods, that the AO had not doubted the sales made by the assessee, that he had held that goods were not supplied by the parties that were appearing in the books of accounts of the assessee. Thus, he had not doubted the genuineness of the purchase as such but he had doubt about the parties supplying the goods. In our opinion,....