TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 352
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....09-10 "1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition to the extent of Rs. 10,649/- corresponding to employees' contribution even when the same is deposited into the treasury by the appellant before the filing of return of income. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in treating the existing liability of Rs. 1,57,854/- on the reasoning of cessation of liability. 2.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the existing liability of Rs. 1,57,854/- without considering the appellant's submission by stating that no submissions have been made. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the Ld. A.O. in disallowing the purchases of Rs. 9,52,592/- claimed in respect of project Green A on the reasoning that such purchases were bogus. 4. Without prejudice to the above, On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the facts that even if the purchases are deemed to be bogus, only a percentage of the total purchas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in la Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO wherein he has disallowed the bonus expenses of Rs. 65,417/-, in spite of the fact that the rectification application was already filed and pending requesting to rectify the said error. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in la Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance on account of depreciation amount to Rs. 3,65,527/-. 9. Appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any of the grounds of appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a developer & carrying on business as promoter. The search was taken place in the premises of assessee. The revenue assessed U/s 143(3)/ 153A of the Act &added back in different heads for both the assessment years accordingly. The addition was made disallowance of delayed payment of PF & ESI, addition of existing liability and claim of purchase related, project Green A, the addition was made for the assessment year 2010-11 related to Section 40A(3), interest paid on delayed of payment of TDS & Miscellaneous expenses and purchase. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal beforethe Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the ld. A.O. 4. Du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6,80,446/- total amount of Rs. 9,52,592/- was made on financial year 2008-09 and the sale was completed in financial year 2008-09. But as per the revenue that purchase was made from Hawala dealers in page no. 34 of the APB also. The learned counsel referred the judgment on which are as follows:- 1. Nimitee Constructions & Designs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 2017(9) TMI 717-ITAT Mumbai. 2. M/s Lotus Construction vs. JCIT-32(2), Mumbai 2018 TMI 1749-ITAT Mumbai. 3. Commissioner of Income-tax-I vs. Simit P Sheth-2013 (10) TMI 1028-Gujarat High Court. 4. M/s Excel Reality N Infra Ltd. Vs DCIT-9(2)(2), Mumbai (Vice-Versa) 2021 (10) TMI 948-ITAT Mumbai. 5. Shri PravinCbokadia vs. ITO-Circle 19(2)(5)-ITA No. 3552/Mum/2019 6. Shri Praveen Singh Chandan Singh Dewal vs. ITO 19(2)(5), Mumbai, 2021 (12) TMI 50 -ITAT Mumbai. 7. M/s Resolve Salvage & Fire India Private Limited vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai 2022 (4) TMI 906-ITAT Mumbai. 8. DCIT, Circle-3(1), P-7, Kolkata vs. M/s narayaniIspatPvt. Ltd. 2017 (10) TMI 67-ITAT Kolkata. 4.5. The ld. DR relied on the order of the Revenue authorities and not able to bring any contrary fact in relation to submission of the assessee. 5. The learned c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned thatground no. 1 related to disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act amount of Rs. 92,400 is not pressed. For ground no. 2 related to late payment charge of TDS amount of Rs. 2,05,630/- is decided in assessment year 2009-10, vide above. For brevity the issue is disposed of against the assessee. Accordingly, ground-2 of the assessee is dismissed. In ground no. 3 related to late deposit of PF amount of Rs. 2,14,848/-, the details submission was made with list by the learned counsel which is annexed in page No. 24 & 25 of the Paper book. The amount was deposited before the filing of the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. The said issueis already adjudicated for assessment year 2009-10 for brevity the matter is disposed of in favour of the assessee. The learned counsel of the assessee has not pressed the ground no. 4 related to miscellaneous expenses amount of Rs. 1,62,407/-. The learned counsel argued on the ground no. 5 for disallowance of 91% of the purchase claimed in respect of project VAL DAF D & ORC, B, C i.e. 91% amounting to Rs. 62,32,777/- which is affected in FY 2008-09 on reason that this particular purchase was bogus. 6.3. The extracted of the order of the Assessing Off....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvestments on. account of Purchases in your cases and added to your total income. Sr no. Name of the Party. VAT AY 08-09 & 09-10 1 Ankit Enterprises 27060103705V 72,23,679 2 Coral Trading Co 27060224373V 91,58,325 3 Darshana Corporation 27020257763V 1,78,32,343 4 Gautarn Traders 27710403514V 14,87/200 5 Nisha Enterprises 27940256772V 56,64,464 6 Pra.ka.sh Enterprises 27840097650V 74,61,220 7 Raj Traders 27450262425V 95,80,729 8 M/s Marco Enterprises 1,11,00,355 9 Sivamani Traders 27290589500V 4,50,961 10 Vinayak Trading Co 27160650342V 6,80,446 6.4. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the revenue authorities and prayed for sustaining the addition. 7. We heard the rival submission and relied on the documents available in the record. The purchase was disallowed by the Ld. A.O. @ 91% of the total purchase. The addition was made fully depending on the available documents from the VAT authorities. No cross verification was allowed by the ld AO. The VAT authorities are generally examining the payment of VAT. The Sale Tax Department mostly concerned about the input tax credit availed by the party & payment of output tax. The assessee had ....