KAMAKSHI DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED ,SURAT vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), SURAT, SURAT

आदेश / O R D E R

PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM:

raised by the assessee are as under:

1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble CIT(A) was justified in upholding the addition made by the learned AO to the tune of /AY.18-19 Kamakshi Diamonds Pvt Ltd. Rs.3,23,84,926/- on account of alleged bogus sale made by the appellant which was duly forming part of the audited books of account of the appellant.

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble CIT(A) was justified in upholding the addition made by the learned AO to the tune of Rs.1,21,696/- being 4% of the alleged bogus purchases made by the appellant.

3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter modify or delete any ground(s) either before or during the course of appellate hearing.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed its return of income for A.Y 2018-19 on 28.10.2018 declaring income of Rs.70,400/-. The AO noticed that the assessee had transactions with M/s Sangam Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. for an amount of Rs.3,23,84,926/-. After verification of various bank accounts of the above entity, the AO concluded that the said concern had no real business activities and it was only an entry provider. Similarly, M/s Antique Exem. Pvt. Ltd. was also operating as a conduit for sending money abroad. The assessee had carried out bogus transactions with these parties to the extent of Rs.3,54,27,318/-. After following the due procedure, the case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 31.03.2022, in response to which assessee filed return of income on 16.04.2022. Thereafter, various statutory notices and show cause notice were issued to the assessee and after considering reply of the assessee, AO added Rs.3,23,84,926/- u/s 68 towards bogus sales and Rs.1,21,696/- being profit on purchases from local unregistered dealers. The total income was determined at Rs.3,25,77,022/- u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act /AY.18-19 Kamakshi Diamonds Pvt Ltd. as against returned income of Rs.70,400/-. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A), who issued a notice on 08.05.2024 which was not complied with by the assessee. A reminder was issued on 27.05.2024 in response to which assessee requested for adjournment. The case was adjourned to 19.06.2024 but none appeared on the appointed date. In view of the above, the CIT(A) upheld the action of AO and dismissed the grounds taken up by the assessee.