M/S. PATSON INDUSTRIES,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(2),, VADODARA

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Vadodara dated 12.01.2017 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10. The assessee main

We have gone through the relevant record and impugned order. The assessee M/s Patsort Industries made purchases from Smt Nainudevi A Prajapati (Prop, M/s. Brahmani Trading Co.). Thus, assessee's Income to the extent of bogus purchases made from M/s, Brahmani Trading Co, has escaped assessment."

Vide notice u/s. 142(1) issued on 02/02/2015, the fact of bogus purchases was apprised to the assesses that during assessment proceedings in the case of Smt Nainudevi A Prajapati (Prop. M/s. Brahmani Trading Co., 492, GIDC, Makarpura, Near Himalaya Machinery, Baroda- 390010)- PAN: ALXPPS917H, it is noticed that during the F.Y. 2008-09 she neither purchased any material from suppliers nor made actual sales to customers but provided accommodation bills. Accommodation sales bills were provided to customers against A/c payee cheque & the amount returned back to the customers by bearer cheques or cash. In view of this please explain as to why the amount of purchases made from Smt Nainudevi A Prajapati (Prop. M/s. Brahmani Trading Co.)

Thereafter notice was issued by the A.O., assessee replied but same was not tenable in the eyes of ld. A.O. and he made addition of Rs. 16,47,640/-.

Before ld. CIT(A), appellant filed appeal delayed by 93 days. Appellant contention is that partner of the firm met with an accident; therefore, appeal could not be filed on time. But ld. CIT(A) was not convinced with the plea of appellant and without deciding the matter on merit. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. In the interest of justice, we are taking a lenient view. We are of the

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.