TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 313
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses to 12.5% as against the entire purchases disallowed as non-genuine/bogus by the Assessing Officer. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that, the assessee engaged in the business of "Civil construction & Developer" filed return of income on 25.09.2010 for the A.Y. 2010-11 declaring income of Rs. 20,49,070/- and the return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, Assessing Officer received information from the DGIT (Inv.,), Mumbai about the accommodation entries provided by various dealers and assessee was also one of the beneficiary from those dealers. The assessment was reopened U/s. 147 of the Act based on the information received from DGIT(Inv.) Mumbai, that the assessee has availed accommodation entries from M/s. V.M. Udyog....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the evidences and various submissions of the assessee restricted the disallowance to an extent of 12.5% of the non-genuine purchases. 4. Inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought by the assessee. Therefore, we proceed to dispose off this appeal on hearing Ld. DR on merits. 5. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. On a perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) considered this aspect of the matter elaborately with reference to the submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451] restricted the di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid purchases by cheques. Therefore, in this case, the source of expenditure for purchases appearing in the books stands explained through the bank account. Therefore in invoking of section 69C in the present case is not proper. 4.3 However it is also a fact that the Sales tax department listed the supplier M/s. V M Udyog as suspicious dealer and the assessee was not having the delivery challans but filed the copies of invoices, ledger account copy and bank statement for payments made for purchases. It is seen that many Benches of ITAT and Hon'ble High Courts have held that when purchases are supported by sufficient documentary evidences, then merely because of non-appearance before the AO, one cannot conclude that the purchase....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es P. Ltd. v/s. DCIT (OSD) Cir 2(3) ITA No. 4804/Mum/2015 7. Turnkey Electrical Engineers P. Ltd. v/s. DCIT 7(3) ITA No. 1936, 1937, 1938 & 1939/Mum/2015 8. Montex Glass Fibre v/s. DCIT 2(2) ITA No. 1520/Mum/2017 9. R.A. Industrial Metals v/s. ITO 14(1)(1) ITA No. 1850/Mum/2015 10. Mehul K. Mehta v/s. ITO 15(1)(3) ITA No. 3227/Mum/2016 4.5 Therefore, the saving on account of VAT and other incidental charges made by the appellant on the said bops purchases can be brought to tax as additional profit. In the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth, 356 ITR 451, Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has upheld estimation @ 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of th....