TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 1568
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after referred to as "the Act") dated 14/03/2016 relevant to Assessment Years (AYs) 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively. Before us, both the parties submitted that though the appeals relate to different assessment years, the facts in both the appeals are identical except for the assessment year and the amounts involved and the submissions made by them while arguing one case would apply to the other appeal also. In view of the aforesaid submissions, we, therefore, for the sake of convenience, proceed to dispose of both the appeals by way of a consolidated order. 2. The assessee in ITA No. 2248/AHD/2017 for AY 2010-11 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in dismissing t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmed by the Ld.CIT(A) may kindly be deleted. 3. Such and further relief as the nature and circumstances of the case may justify. At the outset, we note that the learned AR for the assessee has not advanced any argument on the issue of rejection of the books of accounts as raised in the 1st ground of appeal. Thus in the absence of any argument by the learned counsel for the assessee, we deem it appropriate to reject the same as not pressed. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. The 2nd issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for Rs. 63,44,326.00 on account of bogus purchases. 4. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is an individual and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oversy. In this regard, we notice that the assessee is engaged in trading of goods and therefore every purchase gets matched by corresponding sales/closing stock. Thus, the scope of manipulation in bills towards purchase quantity is nearly non-existent. What at best thus can be manipulated is the price/value of the goods purchased. In other words, while it may be possible that purchases might have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves cannot be treated as bogus. The sale recorded in books is not in quest ion. Contextually, the assessee had declared 7.31% towards prof i t on such alleged bogus purchases. As stated, the relevant documents including invoice, payment through banking channel , quantity tally were m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s discussed above, therefore we are not inclined to take any contrary view. Moreover, the learned DR has not brought anything contrary to the argument of the learned AR for the assessee. Therefore, respectfully following the same the ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2248/Ahd/2017 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed. Coming to Assessee's appeal in ITA 2249/AHD/2017 for AY 2011-12 6. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal. He ought to have allowed the appeal fully in accordance with the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant before him. I. REJECTION O....