M/S. Gorur Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 13/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2020AY 2010-11
Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.13/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Gorur Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., C/O. D.Y. Pandit, Advocate, 1187/10, Krupa, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aadcg5519J बनाम / V/S. Jt. Cit, Panvel Range, ……""यथ" / Respondent Panvel. Assessee By : Shri Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2020 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Thane Dated 28.10.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. The Appellate Order Passed By Ld. Cit (A) 2, Thane Is Contrary To Facts Of The Case & Against The Provisions Of Law & Passed With Preconceive Notion & Best Of Conjectures & Surmises & Therefore Requires To Be Quashed. 2.A). The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Panvel Renge Disallowed The Payment Amounting To Rs. 2,29,96,335/- Made To Four Suppliers Of Pipes On The Ground That Assessee Could Not Substantiate Its Claim By Furnishing Stock Register & Material Inward Details & Relied Upon The Information Received From The Sales Tax Department. Infact The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Panvel Rang Did Not Ask For Providing Such Details Of Stock Registers Or Material Inward Details During Assessment Proceedings.
For Appellant: Shri Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 80I
…d bogus purchases would be added back to the infrastructural profit of the assessee which is exempt u/s. 80IA(4)(b) read with clause (c) of the explanation to sec. 80IA of the Act, as held by the Bombay High Court in the case CIT v/s Gems Plus Jewellery Ltd., 233 CTR 248.” 4. Before us, at the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the above extracted additional ground and submitted that this is a legal issue raised by the assessee and the same should be admitted and adjudicated in preference to the original grounds raised by the assessee in the present appeal. Mentioning that the Assessing…