INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2), KALYAN, KALYAN vs. SUNIL KUMAR JAGANNATH TIWARI, THANE

1. The present appeal has been filed by the revenue challenging the impugned order 13.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2011-12.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called repeatedly, even no application for seeking adjournment has been filed. Which goes to show that assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal.

After having heard Ld. DR and having gone through the facts of the present case, orders passed by the revenue authorities, judgments cited before me. From the records, I noticed that the order of assessment was passed thereby making additions on account of the fact that assessee had made purchases from the hawala parties. However, during the appellate proceedings Ld. CIT(A) restricted the additions by adopting the GP rate @ 20% of the entire purchases.

However, Ld. DR relied upon the decision in the case of NK Protein Ltd Vs. DCIT, [2017] 292 CTR 354 (SC), wherein it was held that “one the purchases are bogus, then the additions should made on the entire purchases and not only the profit embedded in such purchases” I further noticed that although SLP was filed before the Hon’ble Apex Court, however Hon’ble Apex Court had dismissed the said SLP and upheld the decision of NK Protein Ltd Vs. DCIT (supra). Considering the overall facts of the present case, I am also of the view that once it is established that the purchases are bogus then the additions have to be made on the entire purchases and not only the profit 3 Sunil Jagannath Tiwari, Mumbai embedded in such purchases. Therefore, respectfully following the decision in the case of NK Protein Ltd Vs. DCIT, (supra) I allow the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue and set aside and quashed the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the order of that of A.O.

उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst.