Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA
आदेश / O R D E R PER SHRI R C SHARMA (AM): This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y 2009-10 in the matter of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act. 2. Nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of issue and service of notice by RPAD. I found that on earlier occasion this appeal was fixed for hearing on 25.09.2019, and as per the request of the AR hearing was adjourned to . Shri Ghanshyam Soparkar, Mumbai. - 2 - 04.11.2019. Before us neither anybody appeared nor any adjournment petition was filed, accordingly the Bench decided to dispose the appeal after hearing the Ld. DR and considering material placed on record.
I have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that assessment was reopened on finding that assessee was involved in taking accommodation bill with regard to the purchases. The A.O found that assessee was engaged in manufacturing of engineering goods. Assessee has taken purchase bill of Rs. 5,41,796, which was found to be bogus. Accordingly, A.O added this amount in assessee’s income and the action of A.O was confirmed by the CIT(A). I found that no correlative evidence in the form of actual purchase and delivery of the goods at the premises of assessee could be produced either before the A.O or before the CIT(A). Lower authorities recorded a finding to the effect that assessee is a manufacturer, no details / proof of actual use of this items in the manufacturing process could be provided. No stock register of various new material was maintained nor any internal consumption details was produced before lower authorities. Accordingly, I do not find any reason to interfere in the findings recorded . Shri Ghanshyam Soparkar, Mumbai. - 3 - by the lower authorities for confirming the addition on account of bogus purchases.
In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.