2022 (11) TMI 480

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench "B", Pune ("ITAT") in Income Tax Appeal No. 1408/PUN/2015 relevant to the assessment year 2010-11 and Income Tax Appeal No. 1409/PUN/2015 relevant to the assessment year 2011-12, respectively, whereby the appeals filed by the Revenue have been dismissed. 2. The facts and issues arising in both these appeals are identical, however, for the sake of deciding the issue, reference is being made to the facts in ITA No. 673 of 2018. 3. The following questions of law have been proposed for our consideration: a. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in directing the A.O. to delete the addition made on account of bogus purchase ignoring the fact....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... purchases from bogus suppliers? 4. Briefly stated the material facts are as under: The Respondent assessee is engaged in the business of trading in industrial oil and transport services. A return of income was filed by the assessee declaring a total income at Rs.4,47,970/-. The Sales Tax Department of the Government of Maharashtra provided information to the Assessing Officer (A.O.) giving names, addresses and details of persons, who had provided entries of bogus purchases. The said information also contained details of beneficiaries of such bogus bills. Based upon the information so received, the A.O. issued notice under Section 148 of the Act, followed by the statutory notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act and the orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ns, whose names had figured in the list so prepared by the Sales Tax Department, was allowed. It was held that the A.O. had failed to complete the investigation in the case and that the affidavits and the confirmation letters fled by the assessee from three dealers from whom it had made purchases, were not inquired into at all and that the assessee had discharged the onus of proving the factum of making purchases from the respective parties and that there was no contrary evidence brought on record by the A.O. in that regard. It, therefore, while allowing the appeal of the assessee, directed the A.O. to delete the addition on account of bogus purchases. 7. From the above facts it is thus clear that the CIT (Appeals) partially allowed the ....