JCIT)OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. HICON CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

By way of these appeals for Assessment Years (AY) 2008-09 and 2010-11, the department challenges the common order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [CIT(A)], dated 28/11/2018 which has restricted the addition on account of alleged bogus purchases to 25%.

None appeared for assessee at the time of hearing and no valid adjournment application was on record. However, we find that the impugned order is common order for AYs 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11. The appeal of the revenue for AY 2007-08 has already been dismissed by coordinate bench of this Tribunal in order dated 12/02/2020. Facts are identical in all the three years and therefore, we are inclined to follow the earlier order of the Tribunal. 3. Facts in AY 2008-09 are that the assessee has been assessed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 vide order dated 19/02/2015. In the said order, the assessee was saddled with certain additions on account of alleged bogus purchases aggregating to Rs.288.45 Lacs from two entities, the details of which have already been extracted in para-3 of the assessment order. The assessee failed to appear before Ld. AO during assessment proceedings. Therefore, going by the material on record, the said purchases were disallowed and added to the income of the assessee in its entirety. Similar are the facts in AY 2010-11 wherein the assessee was saddled with similar additions of Rs.194.04 Lacs. 4. Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) observed that the disallowance so made would yield abnormal high profits and therefore, the additions were to be estimated at 25% of aggregate purchases. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 5. We find that the Tribunal has already dismissed appeal of revenue for AY 2007-08 vide ITA No.1118/Mum/2019 order dated 12/02/2020 wherein the estimation of 25% has been upheld by the coordinate bench. Respectfully following the same, we dismiss both the appeals.