VARDHMAN REMEDIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13(3)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4679/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 September 2018AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following its own precedent in the assessee's own case on identical facts, restricted the impugned additions to 10% of the amount claimed as bogus purchases. The balance addition was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns additions made on account of alleged bogus purchases from a suspicious dealer. The original assessment was framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity and quantum of additions made for alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal considered a previous decision on similar facts.

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, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2011-12 contest the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-21 [CIT(A)], Mumbai, Appeal No.CIT(A)-21/ITO-13(3)(2)/IT-84/2016-17 dated 26/05/2017 qua confirmation of certain additions on account of alleged bogus purchases. The assessment for impugned AY was framed by Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central-13(3)(2), Mumbai ITA.No.4679/Mum/2017 Vardhman Remedies Private Limited Assessment Year-2011-12 [AO] u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein the assessee has been saddled with addition of Rs.1,18,755/- on account of alleged bogus purchases stated to be made from a suspicious dealer pursuant to receipt of certain information from Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra. During impugned AY, the assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing & trading of pharmaceutical products.

2.

The original return of income was initially assessed u/s 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 27/02/2015 at Rs.60,42,954/- wherein the assessee was saddled with similar additions against alleged bogus purchases stated to be made from four such suspicious parties. The case was again subjected to re-assessment proceedings since it was found that the assessee made another purchase of Rs.1,18,755/- from an entity namely Shree Trading Corporation. This addition of Rs.1,18,755/- is the sole subject matter of this appeal. The Ld. first appellate authority has already dismissed the assessee’s appeal, against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

The only plea raised by Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee [AR], Shri Bhupendra Shah, was the fact that the assessee contested the additions as made in first reassessment proceedings before this Tribunal vide dated 29/09/2017 wherein the additions have been restricted to 10%. The Ld. DR could not controvert the aforesaid fact.

4.

In view of the admitted position, since a view has already been taken by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case on identical facts, taking ITA.No.4679/Mum/2017 Vardhman Remedies Private Limited Assessment Year-2011-12 the same view, we restrict the impugned additions to 10% of Rs.1,18,755/- which comes to Rs.11,876/-. The balance addition stands deleted.

5.

The assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 05th September, 2018.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →