2019 (10) TMI 384

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct'). Though the case was fixed for hearing before the Tribunal on 10.08.2018 and 31.07.2018, neither the assessee nor his authorized representative appeared on the above date. As there is non-compliance by the assessee, we are proceeding to dispose off this appeal after hearing the Ld. DR and examining the relevant materials available on record. 2. The grounds of appeal filed by the revenue read as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in partly deleting the addition of Rs. 85,08,600/- after accepting that the parties from whom purchase were made were bogus and were rotating funds. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in dir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3(6) from the above two parties in order to verify the genuineness of transactions. However, the notices sent by him could not be served and these were returned un-served by the postal authorities with the remark "not known". The AO noted that the TIN Nos. of the above two parties mentioned in the website of the Sales Tax Department are matching with the TIN reflected in the purchase bills filed by the assessee. The AO sent a show cause notice along with the statement recorded by the Sales Tax Authorities to the assessee vide letter dated 10.02.2014 asking to explain why the above purchases amounting to Rs. 85,08,600/- shall not be treated as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. The said show cause notice and the reply to it has been....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mand proceedings, it appeared that the seller parties were only rotating funds in their account. Affidavit filed by the appellant by himself during the proceedings supports the argument of the AO. Though the AO has not made any analysis with regard to the peak purchases and bank transactions from the peak point of view, the assessee himself has worked out and came up with the peak of his purchases. Therefore, accepting the alternate ground of the appellant, the AO is directed to restrict the addition to the peak of purchases of Rs. 31,50,000/- as against the addition of Rs. 85,08,600/-. Appellant gets part relief." 5. Before us, the Ld. DR relies on the decision in N K Proteins Ltd. v. CIT (2017-TIOL-23-SC-IT), N K Proteins Ltd.....