TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 94
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision of the Ld. ITO without analyzing the genuine supporting evidence produced by the assessee. The order passed by the Hon'ble CIT(A) is without analysis and is against the complete facts. Therefore, the addition on account of bogus purchases is prayed to be deleted. 2. The assessee company craves mercy to add/amend any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing." 2. I have heard the both parties and have perused the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities along with the Paper Book filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in which the assessee has attached various documentary evidences for substantiating the claim of assessee. I have also perused the case law summary filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee to suppo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6. The Assessing Officer narrated the facts for taking the action in the case of assessee at page no. 3 as under: 1. "The issue of the instant assessee has emanated as an outcome of the search conducted by the DRI at the premises of M/s Kamud Drugs Pvt. Ltd. at Kolhapur, Mumbai, Ahmadabad, Kupwar & Sangli etc. which is found to be involved in the International Drug trafficking. Sh. Abhijeet Konduskar is the CMD of the M/s Kamud Drugs Pvt. Ltd. 2. The transactions of Mr. Abhijeet Konduskar, regarding the sale of old gold ornaments to Delhi based jewelers viz. M/s hariram Pooran Chand Jewellers & M/s Deepak Kumr Gupta & Sons during the FY 2008-09 relevant to the AY 2009-10 appears to be unrealistic on the ground that Mr. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ideration incomplete as the same are not truly reflected before the Income Tax Department for the purpose of taxation. 4. Finally, the assessee was given an opportunity to file the details of old gold jewellery purchased from Sh. Abhijeet Konduskar, HUF during the FY 2008-09 but in response nobody appeared of the assessee nor any reply is filed in this office till date. This non compliance on part of the assessee makes it clear that the assessee does not have anything to say or to offer any explanation in this regard." 7. After going through the aforesaid facts and circumstances the AO forwarded to the concerned jurisdictional AOs for taking remedial action u/s 147 of the Act for deep investigation and to bring the amount of Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee i.e. M/s Deepak Kumar Gupta & Sons. The disclosure of miniscule net profit against a huge turnover is a strong indicator of accommodation entry provider. The Investigation wing has given an opportunity to file the detail of old ornaments from Abhijeet Kunduskar, but nobody appeared. Assessing Officer also given a similar opportunity to the assessee also while issue a show cause notice requesting the assessee as to why the purchase of Rs. 17,62,765/- made by the assessee from the above mentioned firms/concerns managed and controlled by Shri Abhijeet Konduskar, HUF, details of which has already been provided to the assessee in the reasons recorded by reopening of the case, be not treated as bogus purchase/accommodation entry and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... jewellery and indicates clear cut that there is a matter of Accommodation entry and bogus purchase. 4. Assessee stated that he complied the notice of Investigation wing but no evidence submitted in this regard. Therefore, at this point, Investigatin wing is right that no compliance made by the assessee against letters/notices issued by the Investigation wing and contentions of the assessee is not genuine. 5. The assessee has not quote any reason that why a person from Sholapur, Maharashtra from far distant place from Delhi used to come to sold his jewellery to Sadar Bazar, Delhi. 6. The assessee's Audit report in forms 3CB reflects at 8(a) that assessee is engaged in trading and manufacturing of gold & silver orn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hases as per the above discussions. (Addition of Rs. 17,63,065/-)" 10. The AO made the addition of Rs. 17,63,065/- and added to the total income of the assessee treating the amount of expenses on account of bogus purchases and completed the assessment u/s 143(3)/147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 30.11.2016. 11. The Ld. First Appellate Authority has also upheld the addition in dispute after considering the documentary evidence and written submission filed by the assessee. Ld. First Appellate Authority has given its finding at page nos. 14 to 16 of para nos. 4.4.2 & 4.4.4 and held that the AO has discussed in detail how it is not possible for a person from Kolhapur to sale old gold jewellery to a person in Delhi. Further, the hug....