2018 (5) TMI 2065

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he 'Act'). 2. The grounds of appeal filed by the assessee read as under: 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in appreciating the facts of the case and thereby confirming the assessment order dated 23rdMarch, 2015 with addition of Rs. 28,30,051/- to the total income. 2. The learned CIT(A) improperly appreciated the concept of Unregistered Dealer (URD) without considering the nature of business of the appellant, and thereby supporting the addition of Rs. 23,30,051/. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that non-appearance of parties in response to summons cannot be held against the appellant for supporting the addition of Rs. 28,30,051/-. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred on facts in ign....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed purchases from unrecognized parties to the tune of Rs. 2,26,40,410/-. In response to a query raised by the AO, the assessee submitted that payments to the said parties were made by cheques. However, the AO was not convinced with the said explanation of the assessee and made disallowance @ 12.5% on Rs. 2,26,40,410/- and it comes to Rs. 28,30,051/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and confirmed the disallowance of Rs. 28,30,051/-. 5. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee filed a Paper Book (P/B) containing (i) Ledger confirmations and details in respect of the four specific parties, (ii) Ledger accounts with purchase b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the impugned assessment year is reasonable. The Ld. counsel relies on the decision in CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (2013) 35 taxmann.com 384 (Bom). 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supports the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that the appellant has made purchases from unrecognized parties to the tune of Rs. 2,26,40,410/-. The notices issued by the AO u/s 133(6) were returned by the postal authorities as unserved. Thus the Ld. DR submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) be confirmed. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. In Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal vide order dated 30.04.2010 while allowing the appeal records that the responde....