banner_ad

ITO-20 (2)(4), Mumbai M/S National Engineering Works, Mumbai


Last updated: 16 March 2021

Court :
ITAT Mumbai

Brief :
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2009-10. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).

Citation :
ITA 5196/MUM/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND
SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

ITA No. 5196/MUM/2019
Assessment Year: 2009-10

ITO-20(2)(4),
Room No. 220, 2nd, floor,
Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug,
Parel,
Mumbai-400012.
PAN No. AAAFN 0629 G
Appellant 

Vs.

M/s National Engineering
Works,
19, Atlas Mills Compound, Opp.,
Reay Road,
Mumbai-400 008
Respondent

Revenue by : Mr. Sanjay J. Sethi, DR
Assessee by : None

Date of Hearing : 04/03/2021
Date of pronouncement : 05/03/2021

 ORDER

PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2009-10. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).

Though the case was fixed for hearing on 04.03.2021, neither theassessee nor his authorized representative appeared before the Bench onthe above date. As there is non-compliance by the assessee, we areproceeding to dispose off this appeal after examining the materials available on record and after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR). 

2. The grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue read as under :

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A)has erred in granting relief of Rs.5,39,483/- by restricting the addition to 6% of the alleged bogus purchase from hawala parties.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failedto appreciate the fact that the onus is on the assessee to explain and substantiate the genuineness and the true nature of the purchase transaction. 

To know more in details find the attachment file
 

 

CCI Pro

Guest
Published in Income Tax
Views : 155
downloaded 248 times

Comments




CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members

Follow us
add to google news


Company
01 June 2026
Audit, Taxation & Compliance Executive

R P S K & Associates

Nashik

CA Inter

View Details
Company
26 May 2026
CA / MBA (Finance) / CMA / M.Com (Finance)

Sri Aurobindo Gnostic Centre of Education

New Delhi

CA

View Details
Company
22 May 2026
U.S. Financial Reporting & Consolidation Manager

Karia Overseas

Ahmedabad

CA

View Details
Company
23 May 2026
Article Assistant

Geeta Manchanda & CO.

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
29 May 2026
Company Secretary - Part time

Shaswat initial support private limited

Ahmedabad

CS

View Details
Company
09 June 2026
Accounts Associate

S Madan and CO

New Delhi

Graduate (Any)

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 23 May 2026
Article Assistants

Acupro Consulting

Gurgaon

CA Inter

View Details
Company
29 May 2026
Finance Head

Bhawar Sales Corporation

Chennai

Graduate (Any)

View Details