Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, engaged in wholesale business, faced an addition of Rs. 1,32,080/- under Section 69C during a re-assessment for A.Y. 2013-14, based on alleged bogus purchases from M/s Kasturi Metal Trading Private Limited (KMPL). Despite the assessee denying any transactions with KMPL through an affidavit, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition and dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer failed to provide material evidence or details of the alleged transactions with KMPL. Given the assessee's affidavit denying such purchases and the lack of substantiation by the AO, the addition made under Section 69C was deemed unsustainable and deleted. Other grounds of appeal concerning different additions were dismissed as not maintainable.
Key Issues
1. Whether the addition under Section 69C for alleged bogus purchases was justified without supporting evidence from the Assessing Officer. 2. Whether grounds of appeal pertaining to other additions made in separate assessment orders were maintainable in the current proceedings.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 147, 148, 69C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
Appearances: Assessee represented by : Rip Das, CA. Department represented by : S.B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 08-July-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 03-September-2025 ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2013-14 dated 18.03.2025,
We have considered the submissions made, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). A perusal of the assessment order shows states that the addition of Rs.1,32,080/- was made based on the basis of a survey subsequently