2020 (6) TMI 571

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... neither the assessee nor his Authorized representative is available. However, the Ld. DR for the Revenue fairly submitted that in ITA No.763/PUN/2017, the core issue is bogus purchases addition amounting to Rs. 46,33,142/- and in ITA No.764/PUN/2017, the issue is levying penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') consequent to the bogus purchases addition made in ITA No.764/PUN/2017. For the sake of convenience, first we would take up ITA No.763/PUN/2017 for the assessment year 2010-11 for adjudication. ITA No.763/PUN/2017 A.Y.2010-11 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this appeal are as follows: "1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... conference, the Ld. DR for the Revenue has placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Mohammad Haji Adam & Co. vide its judgment dated 11.02.2019 in ITA No.1004 of 2016. The Ld. DR further submitted that in such situation of bogus purchases, the GP rate of genuine purchases has to be identified and along with that bogus purchase GP also have to be identified. The difference of these two can be added to the income of the assessee. For example, if the GP percentage of genuine purchases comes to 8% whereas GP percentage of bogus purchases comes to 10%, then 2% of bogus purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. 7. We have perused the case records and heard the submission....