TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1278
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-44, Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-44/ITO32(2)(4)/ITA-133/2014-15 dated 15-12-2015. The assessment was framed by ITO 32(2)(4), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2009-10 vide order dated 27-02-2015 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act'). 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es, as listed in hawala dealers by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department who are providing bogus bills of purchase as admitted by these hawala dealers in their deposition before the authorities. The following are details of bogus purchase: - "Sl No. Name of party Amount 1. RK ISTAP 85,17.525/- 2. SHREE NAKODAJI IMPEX 14,90,727/- 3. BHAVANI TRADE LINK 67,60,936/- 4. ENTECH ENTERPRISES ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h court in the case of CIT vs. Mangilal Choudhary 229 Taxman 378 (Raj) (2015) and he confirmed the addition by observing in Para 6.1 as under: - "6.1 It is seen from record that the A.O. has not mechanically disallowed the entire purchases amounting to Rs. 2,37,08,218/-. Further he has pointed out the apparent deficiencies in the books of the assessee and had thereafter rejected the books ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er that there cannot be any sales without purchases. Therefore, the A.O. has mentioned that the assessee did make purchases, but at a lower price so as to increase his overall profits. Since the A.O. has himself given substantial relief to the assessee by a speaking order I do not see any reason to interfere in the order of the A.O. The grounds of appeal No.1 and 2 are dismissed and accordingly ad....