2018 (1) TMI 283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5-16 order dated 30/09/2016 qua confirmation of certain additions on account of bogus purchases. The assessment for impugned AY was framed by Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-5(1)(2), Mumbai on 23/03/2016 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961. The registry has noted that the appeal of the revenue is delayed by 226 days. However, upon perusal of Authorization Memo dated 06/12/2016 as placed on record, it is noted that correct date of communication of the impugned order is 09/11/2016 which is inadvertently written as 23/03/2016 in Form No.36 and therefore, prima facie, the appeal is in order and moreover, the assessee has not raised any objection against the same. 2.1 Facts leading to the same are that the assessee being resident corp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... said concerns. 2.4 Consequently, the assessee was called upon to substantiate the purchase transactions. The assessee defended the purchases made by him but could not produce any party for confirmation of the transactions which led the Ld. AO to disbelieve the said transactions. Finally, not convinced with assessee's submissions, Ld. AO estimated the additions @12.5% of alleged bogus purchases which came to Rs. 73,42,508/- and added the same to the income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee contested the same with partial success before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 30/09/2016 where the assessee reiterate the said contentions. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering assessee's submission & several judicial pronouncements, est....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of business. The turnover achieved by the assessee has not been disputed by the revenue and the payments were through banking channels. The assessee reconciled quantitative details also. However, at the same time, the assessee reflected purchases from seven entities, all of which were controlled by the same group and the assessee could not produce any of the party for confirmation of the transaction. The search / survey action on the group revealed that the said group controlled more than 70 entities with the sole objective of providing accommodation bills to the interested person through network of agents. The entities were being managed by the employees / relatives of the said group who were merely name lender and had no knowledge about....