M/S. RAMNIKLAL SIVJI SAVLA,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)-30, MUMBAI

The facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The assessee is a trader in ferrous and non-ferrous metal. He filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs. 2,80,938/-. The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer subsequently received information from the investigation wing that a scam has been unearthed by the Sales tax department of Maharashtra wherein it was found that some of the dealers were providing accommodation sale bills without actually supplying the material. From the list of such dealers as notified by the sales tax department, it was noticed that the assessee has purchased goods from four dealers for amounts aggregating to Rs. 1.73 crores. Accordingly the Assessing Officer took the view that the above said purchases as non-genuine in nature. Accordingly he reopened the assessment by issuing

The learned CIT(A) restricted the addition to 12.50% of the value of the alleged bogus purchases. Still aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal.

It was noticed that the copy of order of the learned CIT(A) filed by the assessee before the Tribunal is incomplete, i.e. only the first page and the last page alone has been filed and not the entire order. Accordingly the assessee was directed to furnish full set of order of the learned CIT(A).

At the time of hearing learned AR however filed the appellate order pertaining to A.Y. 2010-11. He assured that he will file full appellate order pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10. However, till date the above said defect has not been rectified.

At the time of hearing, the learned AR furnished a copy of the order passed by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in dated 3.8.2021 relating to A.Y. 2011-12. The Tribunal in A.Y.2011-12 has further restricted the disallowance to 8% of the value of alleged bogus purchases.

Since the assessee has failed to furnish copy of the appellate order passed by the learned CIT(A) in the instant year, I am unable to appreciate the decision given by the first appellate authority and hence a decision could not be arrived at. However, I notice that the Tribunal has decided an identical issue in AY 2011-12 in the assessee’s own case. Under these set of facts, I have no other option but the restore this issue to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh by duly considering the order passed by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in A.Y. 2011-12. I order accordingly.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.