VISHAL RAM KHAKAL,THANE vs. ASST CIT CIR 3, THANE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6562/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 April 2017AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided bills and paid suppliers by account payee cheques, and the materials were used in government projects. Therefore, the entire disallowance was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee's purchases from certain suppliers were deemed bogus by the AO based on information from the Sales Tax Department. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of these purchases, which were used by the assessee in civil work contracts.

What were the issues?

Whether the entire amount of purchases from allegedly bogus suppliers can be disallowed when the assessee has produced evidence of purchase and use of materials.

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, “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian
For Respondent: Ms. Beena Santosh
Hearing: 19/04/2017Pronounced: 19/04/2017

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.6562/Mum/2016
ITA No.6563/Mum/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):

1.

These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-2, Thane dated 29/08/2016, in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the IT Act.

2.

Grievance of assessee in both the years pertains to upholding disallowance of alleged bogus purchases.

3.

I have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that on the basis of information received from Sales Tax Department that assessee had effected purchases from various parties who have been declared as suspicion. The AO reopened the assessment and added the entire amount of such purchases in assessee’s income.

6563/Mum/2016 Vishal Ram Khakal 4. By the impugned order, CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO against which assessee is in further appeal before us.

5.

I have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that assessee is a Civil Contractor mainly undertaking work relating to shelter supply projects, road projects and civil infrastructure projects. In the A.Y. 2009-10, assessee’s purchases of Rs.3,67,173/- and in the A.Y. 2010-11 Rs. 13,65,410 were found to be from bogus suppliers. During the course of assessment, assessee has filed ledger copies and bills of all these suppliers. Payment was paid to these suppliers by account payee cheque. Material so purchased was extensively used by assessee in his civil work contracts. Since the assessee undertakes Government Civil activities, the materials received at site was inspected by Government agencies, who are stationed at site and then only used in the construction activities. It is only after using such material on the work contract activities, that the sales bills was to be made by the assessee. The sales so made has been accepted by the AO. Under these facts and circumstances, there is no justification for adding the entire amount of purchases in assessee’s income.

6.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case vis-a-vis nature of assessee’s business, profit rate declared in earlier years and the judicial pronouncements of Tribunal in similar cases, I restrict the addition to the extent of 12.5%.

6563/Mum/2016 Vishal Ram Khakal

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →