TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1595
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TAT has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the assesee - M/s.Aashadeep Industries and has confirmed the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["CIT(A)"], restricting disallowance to 25% of the bogus purchases, the Revenue has preferred Tax Appeal No.606/2018 with the following proposed question of law: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts of the case in restricting the addition to 25% of the value of alleged purchases after categorically finding it to be bogus?" Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT" in Income Tax Appeal No.2040/2014 for A.Y. 2007-08 by which the learned ITAT has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the Re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts of the case in restricting the addition to 25% of the value of alleged purchases for A.Y.r 2009-10 after categorically finding it to be bogus in its composite order for A.Y.r. 2007-08 to 2009-10?" Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT in Income Tax Appeal No.948/2012 for A.Y. 2008-09 by which the learned ITAT has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the Revenue and has confirmed the order passed by CIT(A), restricting disallowance to 25% of the total bogus purchases, the Revenue has preferred Tax Appeal No.610/2018 with the following proposed question of law: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impugned judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT in Income Tax Appeal No.2039/2014 for A.Y. 2007-08 by which the learned ITAT has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the Revenue and has confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A) restricting disallowance to 25% of the total bogus purchases, the Revenue has preferred Tax Appeal No.619/2018 with the following proposed question of law: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts of the case in restricting the addition to 25% of the value of alleged purchases after categorically finding it to be bogus?" Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT in Income Tax Appeal No.791/2013 for A.Y. 2008-09, by which the learne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hereinafter. As these three appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal dismissing the assessees' appeals, the Revenue cannot be said to be aggrieved by the said decision dismissing the assessees' appeals. Therefore, the present three appeals, being Tax Appeals No.606/2018, 611/2018 and 618/2018 stand dismissed on the ground that the Revenue cannot be said to be aggrieved by the said decision of the Tribunal. However, the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Revenue in other appeals in which it is the case on behalf of the Revenue that in fact, there shall be disallowance of 100% of the total bogus purchases. Now so far as remaining appeals, i.e. Tax Appeals No.607/201....