RA BIOATECH P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 13(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7224/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 September 2019AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the additional evidence submitted by the assessee regarding the disputed purchases.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed purchases of Rs. 1,02,11,397/- for failure to establish the genuineness of transactions with certain parties. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance. The assessee's counsel argued that the parties were not actually the assessee's parties and sought to submit additional documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of purchases was justified without considering additional evidence. The genuineness of transactions with third-party suppliers.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh
For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Hearing: 26.06.2019Pronounced: 12.09.2019

This appeal filed by Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-21, Mumbai dated 12.08.2016 and it relates to A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

This appeal was earlier disposed of by an ex-parte order dated 16.10.20916. Subsequently the said order was recalled. Pursuant to the said recall this appeal has been heard by us.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the return of income was filed on 24.09.2009 showing total income at `12,44,370/-. The assessment was reopened by issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1916 (hereafter “the Act”) dated 10.03.2014. There was no previous scrutiny assessment in this case. Vide assessment order under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 dated 23.03.2015 income was assessed at `1,14,55,770/-. The assessee company is engaged in the business of trading of drugs and medicines. The Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to establish genuineness of purchases from the following parties from whom purchases were claimed to be made :-

Name of the party Amt. of purchase Sr. No. 6295361 Pushphari Electricals 85 1. Engineers Pvt. Ltd. 2. Grifton India / Riddhi Enterprise 1250460 Status Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. 2665576 3. Total- 10211397 On the failure of the Assessee to produce the parties and also the genuineness of the transaction, the Assessing Officer disallowed the purchases amounting to `1,02,11,397/- in the assessment order.

4.

Upon assessee's appeal learned CIT(A) confirmed the same. He inter- alia noted that there was no response from the assessee.

5.

Against the above order assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the counsels and perused the records. Learned counsel of the assessee contended that there was reasonable cause why the assessee could not be represented properly before the authorities below. He submitted that assessee was involved in some case and was not in a position to properly pursue the appeal. Learned counsel of the assessee further submitted that the 3 parties with reference to which it has been alleged that assessee was engaged into bogus purchases are not at all the parties of the assessee. In this regard he sought to submit certain additional documents. These documents were not before the authorities below.

6.

Upon careful consideration in our considered opinion the interest of justice will be served if the issue is remitted to the file of Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to consider the issue afresh taking into account for consideration and verification the additional evidences being

M/s. R.A. Biotech Pvt. Ltd. submitted by the assessee. Both the counsels fairly agreed to the above proposition.

7.

In the result this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →