ACIT 17 (3), MUMBAI vs. SANDEEP STEELS, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to discharge the primary onus to substantiate the purchases. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee firm allegedly made suspicious purchases aggregating to Rs. 340.43 Lacs from 8 entities. The assessee provided some documents but failed to produce suppliers for confirmation or vital documents proving delivery of materials.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee discharged the primary onus to substantiate alleged bogus purchases by providing sufficient evidence and producing suppliers for confirmation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue is a recalled matter since the appeal was disposed-off by Tribunal vide order dated 26/09/2018 on account of low tax effect. However, the order was recalled at revenue’s instance vide order dated 03/07/2019 since the matter was found to be covered under exception 10(e) of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated 11/07/2018. Accordingly, the appeal has come up for fresh hearing before this bench.
2 2. None has appeared for assessee. The perusal of order sheet entries would reveal that none is apeparing for assessee since last many ocassions. Even none was present when the appeal was heard on 26/09/2018 and also when revenue’s misc. application was heard on 14/06/2019. Left with no option, we proceed to adjudicate the appeal after hearing Ld. Sr. DR who pleaded for restoration of assessment framed by Ld. AO. The only issue involved in the appeal is estimated addiitons on account of alleged bogus purchases. 3.1 The material facts are that the assessee being resident firm stated to be enagged in steel items was assessed for the year under consideration u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 23/02/2015. The original return filed by the assessee was scrutinized u/s 143(3). However, pursuant to receipt of certain information from DGIT (Inv.) / Sales Tax Department, Mumbai, it was alleged that the assessee made suspicious purchases aggregating to Rs.340.43 Lacs from 8 entities as detailed in the assessment order. Accordingly, the case was reopened as per due process of law and the assessee was required to file requisite details to substantiate these purchases. 3.2 In support of purchases, the assessee furnished certain documents viz. account confirmation of suppliers, stock statement, correlation between sales & purchase. However, the assessee could not produce any of the suppliers for confirmation of account. No fresh confirmation of statements could be furnished by the assessee. The Ld. AO also observed that the assessee could not file vital documents such as delivery challans, transport receipts, octroi receipts, weighment receipts,
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026