2023 (8) TMI 1064

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wing grounds:- "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions of 96,79,247 made under Section 69C representing the whole of the purchases in respect of which the information about bogus purchases was received by the Assessing Officer from the sales-tax department. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in not even considering the Honourable ITAT's decision on the same issue in the appellant's own case for AY 2010-11 wherein the addition was restricted to 2.5% of the alleged bogus purchases though it was cited before him in the written submission as well as during the personal hearing through video conferencing. The Appellant craves lea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....15192V 1197281 5. RAJ TRADERS 27450262425V 563363 6. RIVERGOLD ELEVATORS 27390325605V 781961 7. BLUE NILE ENTERPRISES 27340548975V 1224833 8. OM CORPORATION 27310540795V 1486166 9. SHAKTI TRADING 27300350341V 530818 10. NAVDEEP TRADING CORPORATION 27540616280V 1070635   TOTAL:   9679247 5. During the assessment proceedings, notices under section 133(6) of the Act were also issued to the said parties, however, no such concern was found at the given address. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer ("AO") vide assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act treated the entire purchase of Rs. 96,79,247, from the said parties to be bogus/non-genuine and added the same to the total income of the assessee....