TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 774
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri T.S. Khalsa- Ld. Sr. DR ORDER PER BENCH 1. Aforesaid appeals by revenue for Assessment Years [in short referred to as 'AY'] 2009-10 & 2010-11 contest separate orders of learned first Appellate Authority. However, the facts as well as issues are identical in both the appeals and therefore, the appeals were heard together and are now being disposed-off by way of this common order for the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder proprietary concern namely M/s. Poonam Construction. 4. Pursuant to receipt of certain information received from Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra, it transpired that the assessee made aggregate purchases of Rs. 49.72 Lacs from 9 suspicious dealers, the details of whom have already been extracted in para-4 of the assessment order. Accordingly, the assessee was directed to substantiate the pu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f these transactions. The evidences furnished by the assessee were subject to remand proceedings, wherein the Ld. Assessing Officer reiterated that the notices issued to the parties remained unserved by the postal authorities and the assessee failed to produce the parties for substantiating the transactions. After going through the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) concluded that it was a case, wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re through banking channels. The confirmation of accounts as well as PAN of the suppliers was duly furnished. The sales turnover achieved by the assessee was not disputed by Ld. AO. At the same time, the assessee failed to produce any of the suppliers for confirmation of accounts and notices issued u/s 133(6) did not elicit satisfactory response. Therefore, it was a fit case for estimation of addi....