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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1118/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 February 2020AY 2007-083 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) restricted the addition on account of bogus purchases to 25%. The Tribunal found no reason to deviate from the CIT(A)'s findings, considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment of the assessee, a builder and developer, based on information about bogus purchase bills. The AO made a 100% addition to the assessee's income on account of these purchases.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the extent of addition to be made on account of bogus purchases. The CIT(A) had reduced the addition from 100% to 25%.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh (DR)
Hearing: 11/02/2020Pronounced: 12/02/2020

आदेश / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is the appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-53, Mumbai dated 28/11/2018 for the A.Y. 2007-08 in the matter of order passed U/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

In this appeal, the revenue is aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) for restricting addition on account of bogus purchases to the extent of 25% which was made by the A.O. at 100%.

1.

JCIT(OSD) Vs M/s Hicons Construction 3. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that the assessee is builder and developer. On getting information from the Sales Tax Department to the effect that the assessee has taken bogus purchase bills. The A.O. reopened the assessment and added 100% in assessee’s income. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the issue threadbare and after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and various judicial pronouncements restricted the addition to the extent of 25% of such bogus purchases. Nothing was pointed out by the ld DR so as to persuade us to deviate from the findings of the ld. CIT(A), accordingly we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A) for restricting addition to the extent of 25% of bogus purchases keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, we uphold the same.

4.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12th February, 2020.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →