2021 (6) TMI 807

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... present on behalf of the assessee to represent the case. There is no application for adjournment of hearing either. Therefore, we proceed to dispose off the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and on the basis of material available on record. 3. The Revenue has also raised a ground with a request that though the present appeal is below the taxable limit as prescribed in the CBDT Circular no.17/2019, dated 8th August 2018, however, the Revenue has prayed for disposing the appeals on merit. Consequently, we proceed to dispose off these appeals on merit. 4. Facts in brief:- In the present case, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 144 r/w section 147 of the Act o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant has placed reliance on various judicial precedents as detailed above. The contentions of the appellant have been considered carefully. The Ld. AO had made the addition on account of bogus purchases u/s 69C of the Act at Rs. 21,09,700/-. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. However, the Hon'ble ITAT has restricted the same to 12.5% of such purchases! accommodation entries. The facts of the case suggest that the Ld. AO had made said addition on the ground that the appellant could not prove the purchases under consideration from the parties concerned. It is also an admitted fact that the Hon'ble ITAT has restricted said addition to 12.5%, on estimated/ad-hoc basis. In the case of M/s Ear....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....81,485/- is DELETED. Accordingly the Ground Nos.1 raised in appeal are ALLOWED." 6. The learned Departmental Authorities submitted that the assessee did not purchase any goods from the parties mentioned in the sale bill. The addition was made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of information received from the Sales Tax Department, which had conducted independent enquiries in each of the hawala parties and conclusively proved that these parties are engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries only and accordingly the entire amount of Rs. 21,09,700, was treated as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act. Consequently, learned Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in directing to delete the penalty. 7. Co....