TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1347
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in' law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the initiation of the reassessment proceedings and the reassessment order are bad, both on the facts and in law and liable to be quashed, as the statutory conditions and procedure prescribed under the statute have not been complied with. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in ignoring the contention of the assessee that the reopening of the assessment proceedings of AY 2007-08 has been made on the basis of reopening of assessment proceedings of the AY 2006-07, which has been quashed by Hon'ble ITAT ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the material being purchased by the assessee was found, which confirms the fact that these firms were doing actual business. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in rejecting that the inference drawn by the AO merely on the basis of a statement that these firms are not in actual business is baseless and contrary to the facts on record. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee in ignoring the fact that the quantity purchased and sold being completely tallying, the allegation that the assessee has not made purchases cannot be sustained. 8. On the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee. While framing the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 961 ("the Act"), the Assessing Officer ('AC) made addition of Rs. 19,61,168/- on account of bogus purchases made from M/s. Shree Bankey Bihari Trading Company; Shree Shyam Trading Company and Om Agencies. 4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who after considering the submissions and perusing the material available on record, partly allowed the appeal. Thereby, the Ld. CIT(A) sustained 20% of the additions and rest was deleted. 5. Aggrieved against the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made in the synopsis. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....* M/s. Radhay Shy am and Co. vs. ITO in ITA No. 1429/Del/2015 dated 30.11.2015 before SMC-1 Bench. * M/s. Kishan Lal Gambhir & Sons v. ITO in ITA No. 1516/Del/2015 dated 02.12.2015 before 'F' Bench. * M/s. Kakkar Bartan Store v. ITO in ITA No. 1380/Del/2015 dated 23.03.2016 * M/s. Krishan Lai & Sons v. ITO in ITA No. 1379/Del/2015 dated 23.03.2016 * M/s. Laxmi Dhatu Bhandar v. ITO in ITA No. 1369/Del/2015 dated 23.03.2016 * M/s. Karshni Metal Store v. ITO in ITA No. 1365/Del/2015 dated 23.03.2016 * M/s. Kashmir Metals v. ITO in ITA No. 1366/Del/2015 dated 23.03.2016 * M/s. Bhardwaj Metal (India) v. ITO in ITA No. 1370/Del/2015 dated 23.03.2016 * M/s. Nayar Metal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....avour of the assessee by the decision of the Division Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No. 1367/Del/2015 (Supra). 9. Ld. Sr. DR opposed these submissions and strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 10. I have heard the rival contentions of the parties. I find merit into the contention of Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the identical issues were raised by the assessee in ITA No. 1367/Del/2015 for AY 2006-07 and Division Bench of this Tribunal in para Nos. 10 to 12 has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. For the sake of clarity, para Nos. 10 to 12 of the aforesaid order reproduced as under:- 10. "On careful consideration and vigilant perusal of the orders of the Tribunal including that of the Unique Metal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fit cannot be ascertained without deducting the cost of purchases from the sales as otherwise it amount to levy of tax on gross receipt, she ought to have applied' profit rate in this nature of trade. Estimating profit @ 20%) by taking into consideration the or visions of section 40A(3) will not lead to determination of correct real income. Section 40A(3) is meant for a different purpose when the assessee has made purchases in cash. This provision cannot be applied in such cases. Once the purchases are held to be bogus then the trading results declared by the assessee cannot be accepted and right course in such case is to reject books of accounts and profit has to be estimated by applying a comparative profit rate in the same trade. Tho....