2024 (10) TMI 662

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bunal, Surat in ITA No. 02/SRT/2020 for Assessment Year 2008-09 proposing the following substantial questions of law: - "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has justified partly allowing the appeal of the assessee and restricting the addition to 6% of the total bogus purchases against the addition made by the AO at the rate of 100% of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 19,62,39,212/ ignoring the fact that these purchases are sham transactions fabricated through bogus paper concerns of Shri Gautam Jain Group entities which were engaged in providing accommodation entries? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in not con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt? (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has justified in restricting the addition to 6% of the total bogus purchases even though the AO has made 100% addition of bogus transaction amounting to Rs. 19,62,39,212/-made by the Assessee with the entry provider not appreciating that non- genuineness of the expenditure booked was established by the information received from DIT(Inv), Mumbai and the Assessee was not able to discharge its onus to establish the genuineness of transaction before the AO?" 2. Assessee in this case is an individual and engaged in the business of trading activities of diamond. The assessee filed his return of income on 21.08.2008 for A. Y. 2008-09 declaring total i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the order CIT(A), the Revenue preferred appeal before ITAT. The ITAT by its common order dated 21.02.2024 for A.Y. 2007-08 and A.Y. 2008-09, restricted the addition to 6% of total bogus purchases, aggrieved by which present appeal is filed. 6. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rudram Trivedi for learned advocate Ms. Kalpana Raval for the appellant. 7. Learned advocate Mr. Rudram Trivedi submitted that the order of ITAT is erroneous since it has not appreciated that the reopening was done pursuant to the information received on account of search conducted on Gautam Jain Group. The assessee had made bogus purchases through accommodation entries which facts were unearthed pursuant to the search proceedings in the case of Gautam Jain Group and ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aking a consistent view, the order of Id. CIT(A) is modified and the disallowance restricted to the extent of 0.50% is increased to 6% of the impugned purchases. We further find that in a similar case in PCIT Vs Surya Impex (supra) the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court affirms the decisions of this Tribunal on similar facts. Therefore, taking consistent view, the order of the CIT(A) is modified and the assessing officer is directed to restrict the disallowance of purchases from there three parties be restricted to 6% of aggregate of purchase of Rs. 2.01 Crore. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are partly allowed." 9. Further, in similar fact situation in Tax Appeal No. 105 of 2024, this Court has held as under:....