M/S.STRIPCO SPRINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 13(3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1000/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2018AY 2011-124 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings. While acknowledging the assessee's inability to conclusively substantiate purchases, it found the reduction in additions by the CIT(A) to be justified, representing the profit element in such transactions.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment was reopened based on information about bogus purchase bills. The assessee provided purchase documents and bank statements, but failed to produce suppliers for confirmation. The AO made additions for alleged bogus purchases.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of reassessment proceedings and the quantum of additions for alleged bogus purchases where the assessee failed to provide conclusive evidence of genuineness.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 133(6),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

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

Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The captioned appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2011-12 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-21 [CIT(A)], Mumbai, Appeal No. CIT(A)-21/ITO-13(2)(4)/IT- 149/2016-17 dated 20/11/2017 qua confirmation of certain additions on account of alleged bogus purchases. The assessment for impugned AY was framed by Ld. Income Tax Officer-13(2)(4), Mumbai [AO] u/s 143(3)

ITA.No.1000/Mum/2018 Stripco Springs Private Limited Assessment Year- 2011-12 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act,1961 on 21/03/2016 wherein the income of the assessee has been determined at Rs.9.40 Lacs after certain additions as against ‘Nil’ revised return filed by the assessee on 14/01/2012 which was processed u/s 143(1). The issue under appeal is quantum addition against certain alleged bogus purchases. None has appeared for assessee despite notice and therefore, left with no option, we proceed to dispose-off the same on the basis of material available on record and after hearing Ld. Departmental Representative [DR]. 2.1 The reassessment proceedings were initiated upon receipt of certain information from Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra regarding dealers indulging in bogus purchase bills and it was noted that the assessee stood beneficiary of such bogus purchase bills to the tune of Rs.28,41,238/- from two such parties. Consequently, statutory notice u/s 148 dated 11/03/2015 was issued to the assessee which was followed by notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1). 2.2 During assessment proceedings, the assessee, inter-alia, submitted ledger extracts bank statement evidencing payment to the suppliers, copies of invoices etc. to prove the genuineness of purchases. However, notices issued u/s 133(6) to both the suppliers to confirm the transactions elicited no response. The assessee also failed to produce any of the party to confirm the transactions. The factual matrix led the Ld. AO to treat the purchases as bogus purchases against which estimated additions @30% amounting to Rs.8.52 Lacs were made in the hands of the assessee.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →