Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (7) TMI 630

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2010-11 on the grounds inter alia that: "1. The Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the "Ld. CIT(A)"] erred in passing the order dated 14.09.2021 without providing the Appellant an appropriate opportunity of being heard. Thus, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is against the principals of natural justice and the same may be quashed. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. A. O. in making the addition of Rs.7,91,289/- treating the same as bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that the purchases were duly accounted in the books of the appellant. Hence, treating the purchases as bogus and thereby making addition of Rs.7,91,289/- under section 69C of the Act is unjustified....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') by way of issuance of notice under section 142(1) read with section 129 of the Act. AO issued notice under section 133(6) to the parties from whom assessee had made alleged purchases. On failure of the assessee to furnish any third party evidence to prove the genuineness of the purchases, the AO proceeded to make the disallowance @ 25% of the alleged purchases of Rs.31,65,157/- which comes to Rs.7,19,289/- and thereby framed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act at the total income of Rs.32,21,860/-. 3. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who has confirmed the addition by dismissing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 28 October, 2021 and the decision rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal cited as M/s. Pavapuri Metals & Tubes vs. Income Tax Officer in ITA No.1148/M/2019 order dated 29.09.2020 and in the case of Ravindranathan Nair vs. Income Tax Officer in ITA No.2662/M/2018 order dated 31.12.2018. 7. In the identical facts and circumstances of the case where though the purchases found to be bogus by the Revenue Authorities but sales by the assessee have been accepted as genuine as against these bogus purchases, we are of the considered view that when sales have been accepted being genuine the entire purchases cannot be treated as non genuine to make addition of the entire bogus purchases amount. Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the cas....