TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 277
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee are as under - "Ground 1-The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings merely based on suspicion due to sales tax hawala list. Ground 2-On facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Appeals ["Ld. CIT(A)"] has erred in upholding the disallowance of INR 80,68,124 under Section 69C of the ITA. Ground 3 Without prejudice to the above and on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of entire purchases as bogus. Ground 4-Without prejudice to the above and on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the treatment of the purchases as bogus without disputing c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....odation entries. The AO called on the assessee to furnish details of purchases made from one such party M/s. Vikash Enterprises amounting to Rs. 80,68,124/-. The AO held that in spite of repeated opportunities the assessee has failed to produces the parties along with relevant evidences to substantiate the genuineness of the transaction even though, the burden of proof lies with the assessee. Accordingly, the AO treated the entire purchases made from M/s. Vikash Enterprises as bogus and made addition accordingly. 3. Aggrieved the appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee submitted before the ld. CIT(A) that M/s. Vikash Enterprises was involved in providing the services of interior decorations, repairs and renovations in relation t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... unable to give satisfactory explanation before the AO regarding the genuineness of purchase made from M/s Vikash Enterprise amounting to Rs. 80,68,124/- despite getting multiple opportunity of hearing. In course of appellant proceedings as per the submission of the appellant once it is stated vide sl. No. 1 above that M/s Vikas enterprises was involved in providing the services of interior decorations, repairs and renovation in relation to civil work at client's site i.e. service providers, at the same time the appellant claimed vide sl. No. 14 & 16 to have purchased the goods from said dealer and sold the contract purchased from the said dealer after processing to its customers. Therefore the appellant is totally confused in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e basis for making the addition/sustaining is that the assessee fail to produce any documentary evidences. However, we notice that the assessee has furnished various documentary evidences as mentioned here in above before the lower authorities which have not been considered. Therefore, in our considered view, the addition made merely based on the information received from DGIT (Inv.) without considering the documentary evidences is not correct. Having held so, we are of the view that the claim of the assessee that the transactions with M/s. Vikash Enterprises are genuine and is a back to back contract with a client needs factual verification. Accordingly, the interest of natural justice we are remitting the appeal back to the AO with a dire....