TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1215
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2018-19 and the assessee has filed cross objections against the aforesaid impugned order dated 10.03.2025. 2. Brief facts of the case are, a survey action was conducted on 27.04.2018 on M/s. Sarvroopey Vyapar Pvt Ltd. at Sec 23, Dwarka and M/s. Shashi Sales & Marketing Pvt Ltd., Astral Food Pvt Ltd & Rabik Exports Ltd. at G-10 Padma Tower, Rajendra Place, Delhi. Information was received that during demonetization, huge amount of cash was deposited in the accounts of entities. However, during the course of the survey and from post survey proceedings, it was alleged that there were two main persons, namely, Smt Rani Sharma and Shri Yash Pal Gupta, who were involved in providing accommodation entries of sale & purchase bills to various bene....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') as unexplained money, on account of alleged accommodation entry. 5. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions. The ld. CIT(A), after going through the written submissions and the assessment order, restricted the addition to the extent of Rs. 17,15,009/- by observing as under :- "1. I have gone through the assessment order and the submissions filed by the appellant. It is seen that the AO has made addition to the tune of Rs. 1,27,51,000/- on account of alleged bogus sales. The appellant in its submissions has contended that the AO has made addition on account of alleged bogus sales without considering the information received from various parties ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved u/s 133(6) of the Act. 4. I find that the AO has not disputed the books of account of the appellant and has also not disputed the purchase of the assessee. The AO has not made any substantial enquiries on the evidences furnished by the appellant during the assessment proceedings. Based on the aforesaid, 100% disallowance of sales is not justified. Further, since the AO has not questioned the corresponding purchases made by the appellant, only the profit element embedded in such sale can be subject to tax in the hands the assessee. 5. The assessee, in its submissions has shown the gross profit for the last 3 years as :- Year GP Ratio AY 2018-19 13.45% AY 2017-18 10.47% AY 2016-17 12.58% Averag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the addition without appreciating the fact that Smt. Rani Sharma and Shri Yashpal Gupta in their statements recorded during survey on oath clearly admitted that the both alleged entries were amongst the several entities managed and controlled by them and their associates and these entities are merely used for providing accommodation entries." "CROSS OBJECTIONS : 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by restricting the addition of Rs. 17,115,009/- without proper appreciation of the facts of the case. 2. That the Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in computing the EBITDA without rejecting the books of account under section 145(3) of the Act, thereby rendering the computation arbitrary and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd. 25,300 20,46,079 Total 1,22,500 1,27,51,000 JBF Industries Ltd. 36,300 31,37,063 Total 1,26,000 1,09,26,438 Less : Cost of disputed sales 1,22,500 1,05,72,580 Remaining Stock 4,100 3,53,858 Sales in question 1,27,51,000 Corresponding purchase 1,05,72,580 Gross Profit 21,78,420 GP rate on disputed sales 17.08% Gross profit computation on other sales Total sales 34,99,97,599 Total purchase including direct cost 30,29,27,286 Less : Disputed Sales 1,27,51,000 Less : Purchase....