VISION ADVERTISING P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 890/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 August 2016AY 2010-115 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 69C is applicable only when the source of expenditure cannot be explained or the explanation is unsatisfactory. Since the assessee had made payments for purchases and these were reflected in the books, the source of payment was not disputed.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 2,48,344/- under Section 69C for alleged bogus purchases from two suppliers. The AO's notices to these suppliers were not responded to, and the Sales Tax Department identified them as suspicious dealers.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition under Section 69C for unexplained expenditure is justified when the assessee has made payments for purchases and reflected them in its books of account.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 143(3),Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), & RAJESH KUMAR,(AM)

For Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya
Hearing: 20.7.2016Pronounced: 12.08

सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date of Hearing : 20.7.2016 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12.08 .2016 आदेश / O R D E R

Per RAJESH KUMAR, Accountant Member:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-20, Mumbai dated 5.11.2014 pertaining to A.Y.2010-11. Despite of service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal ex-parte without presence of assessee on the basis of material available before us and after hearing the ld.DR.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →