Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM
आयकर अपील सं/ (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year:2009-10) बनाम/ Baldota Valve and Fitting Income Tax Officer Tax Co. Pvt. Ltd. 9(1)(2) Vs. 86, Universal Industrial Mumbai Estate, I. B. Patel Road, Goregaon (East) Mumbai - 400063 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACB6584F (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��थ� / Respondent) .. Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Tufail Ahmed Khan सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 12.01.2017 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 29.03.2017 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM:
The assessee has filed the present appeal against the order dated 10.03.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] relevant to the A.Y.2009-10.
The assessee has raised the following grounds:-
ITA No.5005/M/2016 A.Y.2009-10
“1. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining addition of Rs.1,58,465/- made by the Assessing Officer on account purchases made by the assessee company and the learned ITO has also erred in levying interest u/s.234B and 234C reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and the provisions of the law.”
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income for A.Y.2009-10 on 16.09.2009 declaring total income of loss to the tune of Rs.3,51,890/- The return of income was processed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short “the Act”) on 03.11.2010. Thereafter, the case was reopened after issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act on 13.03.2014 after recording reasons for reopening. In response to the notice u/s.148 of the Act the assessee’s representative Shri Kalpesh Kaveria, vide letter dated 15.04.2014 informed to consider the original return filed on 16.09.2009 as return filed in response to the said notice. Thereafter, the notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. On examination of the return, it was found that the assessee claimed the purchases to the tune of Rs.2.90 Cr. The assessee claimed the purchases from M/s. Kiran Sales Corporation to the tune of Rs.1,58,465/-. The Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department informed that the appellant had indulged in the bogus sales and purchases. The name of the said firm i.e. M/s. Kiran Sales and Corporation has been cited by the Sales Tax Department on its website, who indulging into issuing of bogus accommodation bill. However, the assessee in reply to the notice took the plea that the purchases were genuine and also furnished the copy of purchase bills, ledger account of purchase party, delivery challans and ITA No.5005/M/2016 A.Y.2009-10 payments made through bank accounts. The assessing officer did not find sufficient evidence therefore the Assessing Officer added the said amount into the income of assessee. The assesse also challenged the said order before the CIT(A) who confirmed the said order, therefore the assessee has filed the present appeal before us.
ISSUE NO.1:-
Under this issue the assessee has challenged the disallowance of purchases to the tune of Rs.1,58,465/- from M/s. Kiran Sales Corporation. Despite repeated calls the assessee nowhere appeared before us. No material of any kind was produced before us to substantiate the claim raised by the assessee. Since the assessee failed to appear before us and no new material of any kind was produced before us therefore we are not inclined to inter fear with the order passed by the CIT(A) in question. Accordingly we decided this issue in favour of the revenue against the assessee and we confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A) in question on this issue.