Sun It Exports, Jaipur vs Assessee

Jh vkj-ih-rksykuh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Vh-vkj-ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM

vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 920/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06

M/s. Sun IT Exports cuke The ITO 569-570, Thakur Pachwar Vs. Ward- 2(1) Street, Haldiyon Ka Rasta, Jaipur Johri Bazar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABFFS 5671 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent

fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri G.M. Mehta, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Neena Jeeph, JCIT .

lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 01/01/2015 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 27/02/2015

vkns'k@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld.

CIT(A)-I, Jaipur dated 10-11-2012 for the assessment year 2005-06.

2.1 The Ground No. 1 about reopening of the assessment is not pressed

by the ld. AR of the assessee and the remaining ground is as under:-

''2. Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining addition of Rs. 5,35,576/- on account of so called purchases from M/s. Vijay Gems treated as unrecorded and profit thereon by imagining the total sale of the purchased goods, ignoring the following facts.

2 ITA No. 920/JP/2012 M/s. Sun IT Exports vs. ITO Ward- 2 (1), Jaipur . .

(i) The assessee firm was not existence in assessment year 2005-06.

(ii) These purchases from M/s. Vijay Gems were made by other person namely Mrs.Sunita Oswal, then Prop. Sun IT Exports (PAN AAGPO 8096E) in A.Y. 2005-06.''

2.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly

conceded that the issue in question is covered by ITAT judgment dated

22-10-2014 in the cases of Shri Anuj Kumar Varshney vs. ITO and

another. It is contended that in this case it is alleged that the bogus

purchases were amounting to Rs. 6,81,943/- which is 25% of the entire

amount and the AO presumed profits aggregating to Rs. 8,52,430/- and

made the addition.

2.3 In first appeal, the ld. CIT(A) made an addition of Rs. 5,35,576/-,

This Bench of ITAT by the above consolidated order held that in cases of

unverified purchase 15% of the alleged unverifiable purchase should be

liable for income-tax. In this case on such purchases of Rs. 5,35,576/-the

addition comes to Rs. 80,336/- which may be added and consequential

relief may be given.

2.4 The ld. DR is heard.

2.5 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials

available on record. We find merit in the proposition of the ld. Counsel

for the assessee that this Bench through its consolidated order held 15% 3 ITA No. 920/JP/2012 M/s. Sun IT Exports vs. ITO Ward- 2 (1), Jaipur . .

of the unverifiable purchases to be the addition to total income. Applying

this percentage, the net addition of Rs. 80,336/- to this extent is retained

and balance is deleted.

3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27/02/2015.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼Vh-vkj-ehuk½ ¼vkj-ih-rksykuh½ (T.R. Meena) (R.P.Tolani) ys[kk lnL;@ Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member

Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 27th FEB, 2015 *Mishra

vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs 'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- M/s. Sun IT Exports, Jaipur

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward- 2 (1). Jaipur

3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy ) @ CIT(A), Jaipur

3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT, Jaipur

4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No.920/JP/2012)

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

lgk;d iathdkj@ Assistant. Registrar