2024 (7) TMI 965

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s emanated from the order of the ld.Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-20(1), Mumbai (in short ld. AO), order passed under section 143(3)r.w.s. 147, date of order- not specified. 2. The Revenue has taken the following grounds: - "1. The Id. CIT (A) erred in holding that the jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act was rightly assumed by the AO. 2. The Id. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ground no.2 of Grounds of Appeal raised before him with regard to validity of addition made u/s 69 C of the Act. 3. The Id. CIT(A) erred in dismissing ground no.3 of Grounds of Appeal raised before him challenging the merits of the disallowance made by the AO of alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 2220594/-. 4. The Id. CIT (A) erred i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsaction. But the ld. AO only relied on the information of the Maharastra VAT department and added back the entire disputed purchase amount u/s 69C of the Act. The ld. AR has drawn our attention on the relevant paragraph of assessment order which is reproduced below: - Hawala Tin Hawala Name Hawala PAN F.Y. Amount (In Rs. ) 27450526556V DEV ENTERPRISES ACGPG0684C 2010-11 199,059 27630780500V BANJARA ENTERPRISES AGKPM3256C 2010-11 457,095 27450597851V VIHOL ENTERPRISES AFFPV2972L 2010-11 515,277 27440573073V PADMAVATI ENTERPRISES ACUPL8372L 2010-11 1,048,300       TOTAL 22,20,594 3. As per the above information received from the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... noticed that the appellant had procured bogus purchase bills from the four parties. AO had independently initiated third party enquiry specifically on these four parties. AO had issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act to the alleged parties; they remained unserved by the postal authorities. Thereafter assessee was asked to produce the alleged parties to verify the genuineness of the purchases.; Assessee could not produce the parties. Further, it is noticed that the appellant -had only furnished invoices of purchase and sales and ledger account to substantiate the claim of relevant purchases as genuine. The invoice furnished by the appellant cannot be treated as genuine in view of the fact that the concerned parties ....