VISHAL PRAKASH AGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 30 (3)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6480/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 December 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed a coordinate bench's decision in a group concern's case for the same assessment year, which had restricted additions for bogus purchases to 4%. Therefore, the addition in the present case was also directed to be restricted to 4%.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the addition of 12.5% of bogus purchases upheld by the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. The assessee argued that a coordinate bench had sustained additions at 4% for similar bogus purchases in a group concern's case for the same assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition for bogus purchases should be sustained at 12.5% or restricted to 4% based on a coordinate bench's precedent for a group concern.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Poojary
For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani (Sr.DR)
Hearing: 04/12/2019Pronounced: 06/12/2019

Assessee by Shri Ravindra Poojary Revenue by Shri Kumar Padmapani (Sr.DR) Date of Hearing 04/12/2019 Date of Pronouncement 06/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03/08/2018 of ld. CIT(A)-41, Mumbai for the A.Y. 2010-11 in the matter of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

In this appeal, the assessee is basically aggrieved by the action of ld. CIT(A) for upholding the addition to the extent of 12.5% of bogus purchases.

3.

At the outset, the ld AR of the assessee placed on record the order of the Coordinate Bench dated 31/07/2017 in the group concern wherein with respect to similar bogus purchases, addition was sustained to the Vishal Prakash Agarwal Vs ITO extent of 4%. The ld AR also filed statement regarding gross profit rate declared by the assessee in the current year and subsequent years and also reliance was placed on the various judicial pronouncements.

4.

On the other hand, the ld DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below.

5.

I have considered the rival submissions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that the Coordinate Bench in the case of group concern M/s Kamal P Agarwal Vs ITO for the very same assessment year vide order dated 31/07/2017 has upheld the addition to the extent of 4% with respect to purchases made from very same parties from which the assessee has purchased. As the facts and circumstances of the present case are same and the purchases by the assessee was also made from the very same party, which was found to be bogus in the case of Kamal P Agarwal wherein vide order dated 31/7/2017, the Tribunal have restricted the addition to the extent of 4%, respectfully following the same, I direct the A.O. to restrict the addition to the extent of 4%. I direct accordingly.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. Order pronounced in the open court on 06th December, 2019.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →