AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 349
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat appellant failed to negate the information based on enquiry conducted by DGIT(Inv.) Mumbai, as per the list on the Maharashtra Sales Tax Website, were hawala dealers and providing accommodation bills. (ii) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law, in allowing deduction in respect of amount of addition on account of bogus purchases as the parties from whom purchases were made were hawala dealers and the absolute burden of proof is cast on the assessee and this burden of proof never shifts to the Department. (iii) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law without appreciating that this being a case of utter disregard and subversion of law, burden of proof cast on the assessee was of a very high degree and assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 70,25,711/- with the above mentioned alleged parties for AY 2009-10 is held to be non genuine as these parties are also considered to be involved in the business of providing accommodation bills as per averments of the sales tax department. The facts that the assessee submitted the bills without any supporting documents coupled with the fact that the parties are considered to be involved in the business of issuing accommodation bills as per the averments of the sales tax department, this proves that the above purchases are not genuine and they have been booked only to reduce the profit and evade tax. In view of the above, I am satisfied that the assessee has escaped income to the extent of Rs. 70,25,711/- within the meaning of se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rontation of them, it is concluded that the assessee has indulged into bog-as purchases with the aforesaid parties. 6. Upon the assessee's appeal, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the assessee has supplied all the necessary documents, hence placing reliance upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (in writ petition no 2860, order dt. 18.6.2014) and several other ITAT decision, he deleted the addition. 7. Against the above order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 8. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that credible and cogent information was received in this case by the assessing officer that certain accommodation entry provider/bogus ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion from these parties nor their current whereabouts are known. In such circumstances, there is no doubt that these parties are non-existent. 9. Hence purchase bills from these non-existent the/bogus parties cannot be taken as cogent evidence of purchases, in light of the overwhelming evidence the revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 and Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. In the present case the assessee wants that the unassailable fact that the suppliers are non-existent and thus bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 12. In the background of the aforesaid discussion and precedent we are of the considered opinion that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in granting 100% relief to the assessee. We further find sales in these cases are not doubted. When sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchase is not sustainable as per the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (in writ petition no 2860, order dt. 18.6.2014). However, the facts of that cas....