ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S RIDGE HOUSING INDIA PVT. LTD., NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 169/DEL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 October 2015AY 2008-094 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, noting that the grounds contested were similar to a previous case involving Piyush Developers, which had been allowed. The revenue could not distinguish the present case from the earlier favorable ruling.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made on account of bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer had disallowed purchases worth Rs. 1,89,87,200/- due to the assessee's failure to prove the genuineness of the parties. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, relying on a previous decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition for bogus purchases without appreciating the assessee's failure to prove the genuineness of the parties. Whether the CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to compute gross profit at 27%.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R. S. SYAL & SMT SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Smt. Nandita Kanchan CIT
Hearing: 01.10.2015

ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

This appeal is filed by the revenue against order dated 25/10/2010 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-I, Ludhiana. The grounds of appeal are as follows:-

1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in deleting an addition of Rs.1,89,87,200/-/- made on account of bogus purchases [relying on the ratio of his own decisions in the case of Piyush Developers (P) Ltd in 10, dated 29/09/2010], without appreciating that despite abundant opportunities given by the Assessing Officer, and being confronted on record, the assessee failed to produce the parties and to prove the genuineness, identity and creditworthiness of the parties from whom the alleged purchases were made, the onus for which had squarely shifted on the assessee after the relevant parties were not found to exist at the addresses furnished by the assessee to the Assessing Officer.”

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in directing the Assessing Officer to compute gross profti @ of 27% instead of (-) 5.70% shiown by the assessee whereas Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed the bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,89,87,200/-.”

2.

Brief facts of the case are that there was search and seizure operation of Piyush Group of Companies on 16/1/2008. During the course of search at the corporate office of Piyush Group, books of accounts were found and seized as per Annexure A-1 to A-79 of the inventory of seized documents. The assessing officer has taken total income of Rs.1,89,87,200/- on account of bogus purchases made during the year against return income of Rs. 9,92,135/- and passed assessment order dated 29/2/2009. The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The appeal of the assesses on the first ground was dismissed by the Ld. CIT (A) relying upon the order of M/s. Piyush Developers and directed the Assessing Officer to compute gross profit @ of 27% instead of (-) 5.70% shown by the assessee.

3.

The AR submitted an order dated 8th July 2015 passed by the ITAT Delhi Bench in in case of searched party i.e. Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd., wherein the appeal of Piyush Developers has been allowed and pointed out that in fact the grounds contested by the Revenue in the present case are similar.

4.

The DR totally relied on Assessing Officer’s order but could not distinguish the order passed by this Tribunal in Piyush Developers case. [Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5599/Del/2010) and ACIT Vs. Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 5706/Del/2010) dated 08.07.2015]

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the records and found that the issue contested before the ITAT in the present case are covered by Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd.

6.

In result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 7th of October, 2015.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →