KRASNY DEFENCE TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(2)(2), MUMBAI

Learned Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of ship repairing and marine services. He submitted that the assessment of the year under consideration was reopened on the basis of information received from the sales tax department that the assessee has taken accommodation bills from hawala parties, without actually purchasing goods. Value of purchases so made was mentioned as ` 29.20 lakhs by the Assessing Officer. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer disallowed the above said amount of ` 29.20 lakhs. In the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) sustained the addition to the extent of 43.15%.

We heard learned DR and perused the record. We noticed that the Tribunal, on identical set of facts, has sustained the addition to the extent of 8% of the value of bogus purchases in assessee’s own case in A.Y. 2009-10 (referred supra). Following the same, we modify the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to the extent of 8% of the value of bogus purchases.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.