SUBHASHISH DUTTA,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O.,WARD-46(4), KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is an individual who filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 29.11.2014 declaring a total income of Rs 4,68,400/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, a notice u/s 133(6) was issued by the AO to M/s. Aparna Sarees Pvt. Ltd. in order to cross verify the claim of the assessee of having made purchases of Rs. 1,47,525/- from the said party during the year under consideration. In reply to the said notice, M/s. Aparna Sarees Pvt. Ltd. however denied of having any transaction made with the assessee during the year under consideration. When this reply received from M/s. Aparna Sarees Pvt.

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Subhashish Dutta Ltd. was confronted by the AO to the assessee, it was submitted by the assessee that the purchases of Rs. 1,47,525/- claimed by him were genuine and there were corresponding sales made by him out of the said purchases. This submission of the assessee was not found acceptable by the AO who treated the purchases of Rs. 1,47,525/- claimed to be made by the assessee from M/s. Aparna Sarees Pvt. Ltd. as bogus and made addition to that extent to the total income of the assessee.

The addition of Rs. 1,47,525/- made by the AO on account of alleged bogus purchases was challenged by the assessee in the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), it was submitted by the assessee that the impugned purchases of Rs. 1,47,525/- were made from M/s. Aparna Fashion Pvt. Ltd. whereas the enquiry was made by the AO with M/s. Aparna Sarees Pvt. Ltd. This contention of the assessee was not found acceptable by the Ld. CIT(A) in the absence of any evidence to support and substantiate the same. He accordingly proceeded to confirm the addition of Rs. 1,47,525/- made on account of alleged bogus purchase. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The learned counsel for the assessee has placed on record before the Tribunal the copies of various bills under which the purchases of Rs. 1,47,525/- were made by the assessee from M/s. Aparna Fashion Pvt. Ltd. He has contended that the claim of the assessee for purchases of Rs. 1,47,525/- thus was Assessment Year: 2014-15 Subhashish Dutta duly supported by the bills raised by M/s. Aparna Fashion Pvt. Ltd. and an adverse inference drawn by the authorities below treating the said purchases as bogus was based on the enquiry wrongly made by the AO with other party namely, M/s. Aparna Sarees Pvt. Ltd. It is observed that a similar contention was raised by the assessee even before the Ld. CIT(A) pointing out the mistake in the order committed by the AO in making the verification from some other party having some resemblance in the name. The Ld. CIT(A) however did not accept the same for the lack of evidence. As established by the learned counsel for the assessee, the claim of the assessee of having made of purchases from M/s. Aparna Fashion Pvt. Ltd.d is duly supported by the relevant documentary evidence in the form of bills raised by the said party and keeping in view the same, I find that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) by treating the said purchases is bogus is not sustainable. Even the ld. DR has not been able to raise any material contention in this regard. I, therefore, delete the said addition and allow this appeal of the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 6th December, 2019.