Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.59 seconds)

Vbcjewellery, Chennai vs Dcit, Chennai on 24 October, 2018

3. It was submitted by the ld.AR that in the course of assessment, the ld.Assessing Officer had disallowed the entire purchases made by the assessee from the persons mentioned in the chart in page-2 of the assessment order (A.Y 2009-10). It was a submission that the Assessing Officer had received certain information from the Sales Tax Department(VAT), Investigation Division, Mumbai, Maharastra wherein the proprietors of those companies had specifically confirmed that they were providing accounting entries and the transactions in their names were bogus. It was submitted by ld.AR that the assessee does not have evidence to prove that the transactions specifically on account of fact that the business of the sellers have closed. It was a submission that the purchases have also been included in the stock and the same have also been sold and if at all what is disallowable was only the gross profit in respect to the transactions. It was a further submission that in fact, no addition was liable to be made in view of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s.VBC Jewellery Vs. The DCIT, in ITA NOs.653,654, 1464 & 1465/Chny/2017 dated 24.10.2018 wherein it had been held as follows:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1