2017 (11) TMI 1197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ld. DR O R D E R Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The captioned appeal by Revenue for Assessment Year [AY] 2009- 10 assails the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9 [CIT(A)], Mumbai dated 20/10/2016 qua relief provided to the assessee against certain bogus purchases of Rs. 47,45,081/-. 2.1 Briefly stated the assessee being resident corporate assessee enga....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 133(6) was issued to the alleged bogus supplier, however, the same was returned back unserved with remarks 'not known' which was confronted to the assessee. The assessee contended that the purchases were genuine since the goods manufactured out of the purchases were sold subsequently and there could be no sale without purchase. However, not convinced, Ld. AO, placing reliance on several judicial ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....delivery / consumption of material before Ld. AO and therefore, the additions were justified. It was further contended that the onus to substantiate the purchases squarely lied on the assessee and mere payment through banking channels was not sufficient to prove the same since no confirmations etc. was filed by the assessee before lower authorities and none of the parties could be produced for con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....yments were through banking channels. On the other hand, the assessee could not produce confirmations from the alleged bogus suppliers and further notices sent u/s 133(6) were returned back undelivered in both the cases. Therefore, in such a situation, the addition, which could be made, was to account for profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize for profit element earned....