M/S. B.M. CHAPALKAR & SONS,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

PER R.S.SYAL, VP :

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09-02-2015 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Nashik in relation to the assessment year 2010-11.

2 ITA No. 243/PUN/2015 M/s/. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons

Accountant of the assessee firm were recorded. The partner of the

firm, Mr. Sandip Bhima Chapalkar, disclosed additional income

of Rs.45.00 lakh for the assessment year under consideration, in

addition to surrender of Rs.30.00 lakh for the assessment year

2009-10. Such income of Rs.45.00 lakh was included in the total

income at the time of filing the return. During the course of

assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that

the documents impounded during the course of survey transpired

that some of the expenses incurred in the name of sub-contractors

were not genuine. The AO caused enquiries to be conducted by

means of notice u/s.133(6) to the sub-contractors for carting and

sublet work. No response came from such parties. The assessee

was also confronted with the situation. Since the assessee could

not furnish confirmation letters from the sub-contractors/carting

agents, the AO made addition of Rs.1,52,05,180/- on this score.

Apart from that, the AO observed that statement of the partner of

the assessee firm divulged that the assessee inflated expenditure

under the guise of payment to sub-contractors. The assessee

admitted to have made such bogus payments during the year under

consideration amounting to Rs.19,99,920 and Rs.15,65,500/- to the

3 ITA No. 243/PUN/2015 M/s/. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons

sublet contractors, namely, Mr. Popat Hake and Mr. Nurey Aslam

Ansari. Addition of Rs.35,65,420/- was made on this score.

Further, the assessee was found to have recorded hawala purchases

amounting to Rs.27,30,251/-. Addition for this sum was also made

by the AO. In the first appeal, the assessee contended that it made

a surrender of Rs.45.00 lakh which ought to have been taken into

consideration while making the additions. It was also submitted

that the assessee had necessary evidence to show that all the

transactions were genuine. The ld. CIT(A) sustained the first

addition to the extent of Rs.81,41,143/- as against Rs.1.52 crore

made by the AO. The other additions of Rs.35.65 lakh and

Rs.27.30 lakh were confirmed in the first appeal. The assessee is

aggrieved by the sustenance of these additions.

material on record, it is noted that the addition similar to Rs.1.52

crore and odd was made by the AO in his order for the assessment

year 2009-10. When the matter came up for consideration, the

Tribunal vide its order dated 25-07-2014 in ITA

No.1490/PUN/2012 restored the addition in respect of sublet work

and carting charges with certain directions to the file of AO for a

4 ITA No. 243/PUN/2015 M/s/. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons

fresh decision. There is no qualitative difference between the facts

of the addition of Rs.1.52 crore made by the AO which got reduced

in the first appeal to the tune of Rs.81,41,143/- and the other

addition of Rs.35.65 lakh which was again made in similar

circumstances. Though the factual position in respect of third

addition of Rs.27.30 lakh towards bogus purchases is somewhat

different in the factual panorama, but the ld. AR submitted that one

more opportunity be granted to the assessee to put forth the

genuineness of the transactions. Respectfully following the order

passed by the Tribunal for the immediately preceding assessment

year and the other relevant factors as noted above, we are of the

considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately

if the impugned order on this score is set-aside and the matter is

restored to the file of AO. We order accordingly and direct the AO

to decide the fate of these three additions afresh as per law in

consonance with the directions given by the Tribunal in its order

for the immediately preceding assessment year. Needless to say,

the assessee will be allowed an opportunity of hearing in such fresh

proceedings.

5 ITA No. 243/PUN/2015 M/s/. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons

16th Order pronounced in the Open Court on

December, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 16th December, 2019 सतीश आदेश क� क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Nashik 4. The CIT -1, Nashik िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे 5. “बी” / DR ‘B’, ITAT, Pune गाड� फाईल / Guard file 6. आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

ITA No. 243/PUN/2015 M/s/. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons

Date 1. Draft dictated on 10-12-2019 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 11-12-2019 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed JM before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved JM by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *