DCIT 28(2), NAVI MUMBAI v. OM DEVELOPERS, NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 5849/MUM/2015 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 584919914 RSA 2015
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 5849/MUM/2015
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant DCIT 28(2), NAVI MUMBAI
Respondent OM DEVELOPERS, NAVI MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Department
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted Not Allotted
Tribunal Order Date 08-11-2017
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 30-12-2015
Judgment Text
ITA.NO.5849/MUM/2015 OM DEVELOPERS ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-2011 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL AM ./I.T.A. NO.5849/MUM/2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-2011) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 28(2) 3 RD FLOOR TOWER NO.6 VASHI RAILWAY STATION COMPLEX VASHI NAVI MUMBAI-400 703 / VS. OM DEVELOPERS OFF. NO.14 MAHAVIR CENTRE SECTOR-17 VASHI NAVI MUMBAI-400 705 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AAAFO-9862-A ( /APPELLANT ) : ( !' / RESPONDENT ) A SSESSEE BY : NONE RE VENUE BY : RAJAT MITTAL LD. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 11/10/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/11/2017 ITA.NO.5849/MUM/2015 OM DEVELOPERS ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-2011 2 / O R D E R PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR [AY] 2010- 11 ASSAILS THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF IN COME-TAX (APPEALS)- 26 [CIT(A)] MUMBAI APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-26/IT/771/13/-14/66 DATED 16/10/2015 QUA RELIEF PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINST CERTAIN ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSMENT FOR IMPUGNED AY WAS FRAMED BY LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-28(2) [AO] MUMBAI U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ON 20/03/201 3. NONE HAS APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE AND THEREF ORE LEFT WITH NO OPTION WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE BASI S OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE [DR]. 2.1 FACTS LEADING TO THE SAME ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING RESIDENT FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CIVIL CONSTRUCTION BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS WAS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) FOR IMPUGNED AY ON 20/03/2013 A T RS.1 48 22 370/- AS AGAINST RETURNED INCOME OF RS.26 10 200/- E-FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 28/09/2010. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFERED ADDITION OF R S.1 19 09 038/- ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN BOGUS PURCHASES AND SAME IS THE SOLE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS APPEAL. 2.2 DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOTICE U/S 133(6 ) WAS SENT TO FEW SUPPLIERS TO CONFIRM THE PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS. HOW EVER NOTICE U/S 133(6) SENT TO TWO SUPPLIERS FROM WHOM PURCHASES WE RE MADE FOR RS.1 19 09 038/- REMAINED UN-SERVED. THESE PARTIES WERE IDENTIFIED / ITA.NO.5849/MUM/2015 OM DEVELOPERS ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-2011 3 LISTED AS HAWALA PARTIES BY SALES TAX DEPARTMENT MAHARASHTRA. UPON CONFRONTATION THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY P ARTY FOR CONFIRMATION WHICH LED THE LD. AO TO DISBELIEVE THE SAID TRANSAC TIONS AND RESULTANTLY THE SAME WERE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CONTESTED THE SAME WITH PARTIAL SUCCESS BEFORE LD. CIT(A) VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16/10/2 015 WHERE LD. CIT(A) AFTER APPRECIATING THE FACTUAL MATRIX RESTRI CTED THE ADDITIONS TO GROSS PROFIT MARGIN OF 23.42% BEING REFLECTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR IMPUGNED AY. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE [DR] CONTEND ED THAT THE ASSESSEE MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE THE PURCHASE TRA NSACTIONS BY PRODUCING THE SUPPLIERS AND THEREFORE LD. CIT(A) E RRED IN GRANTING SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY HEARD THE CONTENTIONS AND PERU SED RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINIO N THAT THERE COULD BE NO SALE WITHOUT PURCHASE /CONSUMPTION OF MATERIAL S INCE THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN CIVIL CONSTRUCTION. THE SALES TURNOVER ACHIEVED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE AND T HE PAYMENTS WERE THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS. THE PURCHASES WERE BACKED BY INVOICES. AT THE SAME TIME THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY C ONFIRMATION FROM THE IMPUGNED SUPPLIERS AND ALL NOTICES SENT U/S 133 (6) REMAINED UN- SERVED WHICH CAST SERIOUS DOUBT ON ASSESSEES CLAIM. THE REFORE IN SUCH A SITUATION THE ADDITION WHICH COULD BE MADE WAS TO ACCOUNT FOR PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED IN THESE PURCHASE TRANSACTI ONS TO FACTORIZE FOR PROFIT ELEMENT EARNED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST POSSIBLE PURCHASE OF MATERIAL IN THE GREY MARKET AND UNDUE BENEFIT OF VAT AGAINST SUCH BOGUS ITA.NO.5849/MUM/2015 OM DEVELOPERS ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-2011 4 PURCHASES WHICH LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DONE. THERE FORE FINDING THE SAME TO BE QUITE FAIR & REASONABLE WE DISMISS REVE NUES APPEAL. 6. RESULTANTLY THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08 TH NOVEMBER 2017. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 08.11 .2017 SR.PS:- THIRUMALESH ! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. !' / THE RESPONDENT 3. * ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. * / CIT CONCERNED 5. !$- - / DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. ./ / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI