ITO WD 2(2), KALYAN vs. MAHESH K LALWANI, ULHASNAGAR

This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of the CIT (A)-3 Mumbai dated 13.02.2015 for the assessment year 2011-2012. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following solitary grounds in this appeal which reads as under:- “The CIT (A) erred in law as well as on facts of the case and has applied the ratio of 25% on the Hawala purchases thereby upholding addition to the extent of Rs. 8,91,941/- (25% Rs. 35,09,500/-) and deleting the rest of the additions of Rs. 26,75,824/-. However, the Ld CIT (A) has himself observed in para 5 of the appellate order that the assessee has failed to furnish the copy of ledger accounts from the suppliers. The assessee has not been able to produce parties in person and no corroborative evidence such as inward register, outward register, deliver challans, octroi receipts etc were produced to justify the genuineness of purchases.”

Before me, Ld Counsel for the assesssee briefly narrated the facts of the case and demonstrated that the tax effect in this case comes to below Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, this is covered by the CBDT Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 which is relevant for the proposition that the appeals filed by the Revenue with a tax effect of Rs. 10 lakhs and below are to be either dismissed by the Tribunal as not maintainable or not pressed by the Revenue.