TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 990
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in ITA No.3147/Ahd/2008 for A.Y.2005-2006 are as under: '1. The ld. ITO has erred in law and on the facts of the appellant's case in assessing the total income of the appellant at ₹ 13,88,168/- instead of ₹ 1,96,710/- returned by the appellant. 2. The ld.ITO has erred in law and on the facts of the appellant's case in making addition of ₹ 11,91,458/- on the erroneous plea that purchases made by the appellant from M/s.R.R.Patel trading corporation is bogus." The grounds of the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.3273/Ahd/2009 for A.Y.2006-2007 are as under: '1. The ld. ITO has erred in law and on the facts of the appellant's case in assessing the total income of the appellant at ₹ 14,72,340/- instead of S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee had failed to prove the genuineness of the purchases made from Shri Ravish R. Patel, Prop.of R.R.Patel Trading Corporation and also failed to prove the nexus of payment during the year under consideration." 4. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the only issue in all these four cross-appeals by the assessee and the Revenue is with regard to the addition made by holding the goods purchased from certain parties as bogus and the entire purchase amount of goods was added as income in the hands of the assessee. She submitted that the CIT(A) has reduced the addition by sustaining the addition at 25% of the purchase amount booked ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hynoup Food & Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd., 290 ITR 702 (Guj) applies to the case of the assessee. He submitted that in this case, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that the applicability of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act was applicable to the case of bogus purchases as the genuineness of the payment and identity of the payee were the first and foremost requirement of law, which could not be proved by the assessee. He submitted that once the purchase made from a particular party is not proved, the entire purchase amount has to be added as income of the assessee. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee in her rejoinder submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble ....