TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 1327
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spondent by: None ORDER Per Bench These appeal have been filed by the Revenue against the orders of the CIT(A)-42, Mumbai dated 12.03.2015 for assessment years 2009-10 to 201-12. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, they are disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds for assessment years 2009-10 and 2011....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce of accounts of the assessee and the same is not in conformity with the prescribed norms the assessee has failed to maintain and produce the books." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and is the proprietor of M/s. Giriraj Enterprises, engaged in the business of trading in Rubber & Rubber chemicals. The assessee made purchases from the following parties who w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5.07% and restricted the addition to Rs. 30,86,720/-. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. The learned D.R. submitted before that in the case of NK Proteins Ltd. vs. DCIT the Hon'ble Supreme Court has confirmed the addition on account of bogus purchases at 100% and similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and applied GP @6%. 6. Having heard the learned D.R.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be applied in such bogus purchases. We find that in the case of Smith and Sheth the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that a trader sold some goods and he would purchase the same from other sources. When the total sale is accepted by the AO he could not have questioned the very basis of purchase. Therefore purchases are not bogus but they are made from parties other than those who are menti....