TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 161
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 vide order dated 03.04.2018. 2. In these appeals by the assessee, the Tribunal has restricted the disallowance for bogus purchases from 25% done by the ld. CIT(A) to 12.5%. 3. The first submission of the ld. Counsel of the assessee is that the assessee has raised the following issues: a) Issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) premature/invalid as no return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 was filed. 4. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel of the assessee that the above ground has not been adjudicated by the Tribunal. 5. Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that there was no such ground raised by the assessee. Hence, it is submitted that there is no mistake apparent from the record. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... invalidate the reopening. Furthermore, the ld. Counsel of the assessee has alleged that the reopening was done on bogus purchase while in completing the assessment, purchases were treated as genuine. This in our opinion has no merits. The Assessing Officer has confirmed 100% of the purchase as unexplained expenditure. 8. The ld. Counsel of the assessee has quoted case laws for the proposition that the above decision of the Tribunal was erroneous. In our considered opinion, if the assessee is not satisfied by the order of the Tribunal, it cannot lead to an inference that there is a mistake apparent from the record. 9. Further, the ld. Counsel of the assessee has challenged the tribunal's finding that the assessee was dealing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that credible and cogent information was received in this case by the assessing officer that certain accommodation entry provider/bogus suppliers were being used by certain parties to obtained bogus bills, assessee was found to have taken accommodation entry/bogus purchase bills during the concerned assessment year from different parties. Based upon this information assessment was reopened. The credibility of information relating to reopening has been confirmed by the learned CIT(A) and by ITAT as above. Furthermore it is noted that in such factual scenario Assessing Officer has made the necessary enquiry. The issue of notice to all the parties have returned unserved. Assessee has not been able to provide any confirmation from any of the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tent and thus bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above apex court decisions. 19. In these circumstances learned departmental representative has referred to Hon'ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of Appeal No. 240 of 2003 in the case of N K Industries vs Dy CIT, order dated 20.06.2016, wherein hundred percent of the bogus purchases was held to be added in the hands of the assessee and tribunals restriction of the addition to 25% of the bogus purchases was set aside. It was expounded that when purchase bills have been found to be bogus 100% disallowance was required. The special leave petition against this order al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2014). However, the facts of that case were different inasmuch as sales were to the Government department. However the facts and circumstances of the present case indicate that assessee has engaged into dealings in the grey market. Dealings in the grey market give the assessee various savings at the expense of the Exchequer. Hence, on the overall consideration of facts and circumstances and following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.) we hold that a disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchase would meet the end of justice. Accordingly, we modify the order's of authorities below and direct that the disallowance in this case should be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the ld. Counsel of the assessee do not support the case of the assessee. Furthermore, since we have considered the issue on the basis of the Hon'ble Apex Court decision and the decision of the Hon'ble High Courts referred hereinabove, the decisions of the tribunal referred by the ld. Counsel of the assessee are not relevant. Furthermore, those decisions were rendered on the facts of those cases. 12. From the above, we note that the ITAT had given a finding which was overwhelmingly in support of the Revenue department's action. Further, as a matter of fact, after noting the facts of the case and the case laws in para 20, the ITAT has noted that it was not the appeal by the Revenue and thereafter it had given relief to the assessee. I....