INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RAMESH SAWANTMAL BHANSALI, MUMBAI

आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ITO-19(3)(1) Shri Ramesh Sawantmal Bhansali बनाम/ Room No.202, 8th Floor 35-39, Sagar Building Matru Mandir V.P. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 007. Mumbai- 400 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AEMPB-0518-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Rajkumar Singh -Ld.AR Revenue by : Ms. Jyoti Lakshmi Nayak -Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 04/02/2020 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 19/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2010-11 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income- Tax (Appeals)-54 , Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], order dated 13/04/2018, Appeal No. CIT(A)-30/IT-10326/ITO.19(3)(1)/2017-18 on following grounds of appeal:- i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing AO to restrict the estimation of the profit @ 12.5 instead of 25% of the total non-genuine purchases without accepting that the assessee did not discharge his duty 2 Shri Ramesh Sawantmal Bhansali Assessment Year :2010-11 to prove that the purchases made from the thirteen parties were genuine and did not produce any delivery challans, transport receipts, goods inward register maintained at gooddown etc?." 2) ''Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in directing AO to reduce the GP already shown by the assessee on these bogus purchases without accepting that the assessee did not discharge his duty to prove that the purchases made from the thirteen parties were genuine and did not produce any delivery challans, transport receipts, goods inward register maintained at gooddown etc?." 3) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition @ 12.5 profit rate on total purchases of Rs. 3,04,49,187/- made by the assessee from the thirteen parties when during the investigation by sales tax department of Maharashtra Government, it was the conclusively proved beyond doubt that these parties are only into providing accommodation entries and do not do any real business?" 4) The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” As evident from grounds of appeal

, the sole issue that arises for our consideration is estimated additions on account of alleged bogus purchases.

2. The Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee (AR), at the outset, submitted that the assessee had also preferred further appeal against the appellate order before this Tribunal vide order dated 05/11/2019 wherein the matter has been restored back with certain directions. A copy of the order has been placed on record.

3. In the above background, we find that the assessee being resident individual was assessed for year under consideration u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 29/01/2016 wherein it was saddled with estimated additions of 25% against alleged bogus purchases for Rs.304.49 Lacs. Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) restricted the additions to 12.5%. Aggrieved, the assessee as well as revenue preferred further appeal against the same.

4. We find that the assessee’s appeal has already been disposed-off by SMC bench of this Tribunal vide ITA No. 4690/Mum/2018 order dated