2020 (10) TMI 95

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Revenue has proposed the following substantial question of law for the consideration of this Court:- "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition of Rs. 55,61,085/- made on account of bogus purchases to the extent of 5% of the total bogus purchases despite the fact that the assessee failed to establish genuineness of purchases? ; 3. It appears from the materials on record that the assessee filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2011-12 on 29.09.2011 declaring the total income of Rs. 7,66,360/-. On the basis of the information received from the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department that the assessee had made bogus purchases from M/s. Fasto Traders Pvt.Ltd.of Rs. 8,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t appeal. 8. We have heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue. 9. We take notice of the findings recorded by the Tribunal. The findings are as under:- "10.2 From the preceding discussion we also note that the assessee has claimed to have made sales against such purchases which have been admitted by the Revenue. As such in our considered view, such sales cannot be executed without having the coresponding purchases. There was no defect pointed out by the authorities below insofar the sales made against such purchases. Moreover, there is also no allegation regarding the genuiness of the books of accounts which were duly audited under the Income Tax Act. 10.3 However, ....