TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 924
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion u/s 68 of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 1,02,25,513/- made by Assessing Officer in respect of hawala purchases. 3. In so doing he did not appreciate the material & submissions made before him. 4.Your appellant submits that due relief be allowed. 5. The appellant company craves to add to, alter or amend the foregoing grounds, which are without prejudice to one another, at the time of hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of textiles, filed its return of income for AY 2012-13 on 27/09/2012, declaring total income at Rs. 3,37,27,955/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r observed that both parties are appeared in the list of Hawala/suspicious dealers prepared by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, therefore, after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon various judicial precedence, including the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. Simith Sheth vs CIT (356 ITR 451) estimated 12.5% profit on alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 8,18,04,105/- and made additions of Rs. 1,02,25,513/- to the total income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has reiterated its submissions made before the Assessing Officer to argue that share....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt received from two subscribers as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. Similarly, as regards additions made towards alleged bogus purchases, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the facts brought out by the Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings, clearly established the nature of transactions between the parties, as per which the assessee has failed to prove purchases from above two parties with necessary evidences. This fact is further strengthened by the findings of the Sales Tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra where the parties have admitted in their statement that they are involved in providing accommodation entries without there being any business activities. The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant submissions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, it is for the assessee to discharge the onus cast upon it by filing necessary evidences. Since, the assessee has not offered any explanation for forfeiture of shares and also failed to prove identity, genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness of the parties, came to the conclusion that transaction between the parties are sham, which are not supported by necessary details. Facts remains unchanged, the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details before us to controvert findings of the facts recorded by the lower authorities. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is nothing to offer from the assessee side in order to prove the transactions of allotment of shares to two subscribers with any evidences and hence, we a....