Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) Jaipur v. M/S Clarity Gold (P) Ltd

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH ATJAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 125 / 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Jaipur ----Appellant Versus M/S Clarity Gold (P) Ltd.,4, Ganga Vihar, Sardar Patal Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondent D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 126 / 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Jaipur ----Appellant Versus M/S Clarity Gold (P) Ltd.,4, Ganga Vihar, Sardar Patal Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondent D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 127 / 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Jaipur ----Appellant Versus M/S Clarity Gold (P) Ltd., 4, Ganga Vihar, Sardar Patal Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondent D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 128 / 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Jaipur ----Appellant Versus M/S Clarity Gold (P) Ltd., 4, Ganga Vihar, Sardar Patal Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondent _____________________________________________________ For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta with Mr. Sameer Sharma and Mr. Gaurav Gaur For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.L. Agarwal with Mr. S. L. Poddar _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS Judgment 19/09/2017 1. In all these appeals since identical questions of law and factsare involved, they are decided by this common judgment. 2.By way of these appeals, the appellant has challenged thejudgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal hasallowed the appeal of the assessee. 3.This court while admitting the appeals framed the followingquestion of law:- 1. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 125/2014 “Whether the ITAT order is perverse in deleting theentire trading addition of Rs. 7,15,57,073/- ignoringadmitted facts in the statement of Shri Khushi KumarAmeriya (Director) u/s 132(4) of the IT Act as well asthe evidences gathered during search confirming boguspurchase bills obtained?” 2. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 126/ 2014 “Whether the ITAT order is perverse in deletingthe entire trading addition of Rs. 60,94,433/- ignoringadmitted facts in the statement of Shri Khushi KumarAmeriya (Director) u/s 132(4) of the IT Act as well asthe evidences gathered during search confirming bogus purchase bills obtained?” 3. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 127/ 2014 “Whether the ITAT order is perverse in deletingthe entire trading addition of Rs. 5,12,77,217/-ignoring admitted facts in the statement of Shri KhushiKumar Ameriya (Director) u/s 132(4) of the IT Act aswell as the evidences gathered during searchconfirming bogus purchase bills obtained?” 4. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 128/2014 “Whether the ITAT order is perverse in deletingthe entire trading addition of Rs. 4,21,16,555/-ignoring admitted facts in the statement of Shri KhushiKumar Ameriya (Director) u/s 132(4) of the IT Act aswell as the evidences gathered during searchconfirming bogus purchase bills obtained?” Facts of the case are that the assessee company derives 4. purchase bills obtained?” 3. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 127/ 2014 “Whether the ITAT order is perverse in deletingthe entire trading addition of Rs. 5,12,77,217/-ignoring admitted facts in the statement of Shri KhushiKumar Ameriya (Director) u/s 132(4) of the IT Act aswell as the evidences gathered during searchconfirming bogus purchase bills obtained?” 4. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 128/2014 “Whether the ITAT order is perverse in deletingthe entire trading addition of Rs. 4,21,16,555/-ignoring admitted facts in the statement of Shri KhushiKumar Ameriya (Director) u/s 132(4) of the IT Act aswell as the evidences gathered during searchconfirming bogus purchase bills obtained?” Facts of the case are that the assessee company derives 4. its income from business of manufacturing of jewellery and intrading of gems stones. The background of search action on theClarity Group was survey under Section-133A conducted inFY2007-08 by the BCTT Wing of the Investigation Directorate ofJaipur which revealed that Clarity Gold Pvt Ltd. And its sisterconcerns M/s Marine Minerals and Herbal Remedies Pvt. Ltd.Jaipur had obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs.13.59 crores from various entry providers, who provided bogussale bills without supplying the goods mentioned in the bills.After search (20.05.2009) the case of the assesssee wascentralized with ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur, who issued noticeunder Section-153A to the assessee company on 23.09.2009. Inresponse the return was filed on 28.04.2011, declaring incomeof Rs. 17,86,470. Assessment was completed at Rs. 98,87,157through order dated 23.08.2011 passed under Section-143(3)r.w.s.153A by the ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. 5.We have heard Mr. Mehta counsel for the appellant and Mr.Gupta counsel for the respondents. 6. Taking into consideration the evidence on record, theTribunal while considering the matter has totally deleted theamount of addition. In our considered opinion, taking into accountthe industry which is running the business, the addition which hasbeen made on the bases of GP which has been shown of theidentical industry whose case is also heard together. The GP rate of previous years reads as under:- A.Y.2004-052005-062006-072007-082008-2009-102009-102010-1109unauditeSales19849014269035466428687497997777510306287 10720331540384486Stock Dif.14465751478680714505767692683951400 83334242575009537Total212955719416905466428758948510545111145801 11553681211539410Purchases18102316988784962283686702393766896584379 991030511S7482452Direct Cost061182769962436140977213120986071181031934681634032Total18102317600615061907700800095078997445091 10013498195645871Grow3193228181629240452065S1484494661814012920 1540182815893585G. P. rate16.08%12.72%7.40%8.45%9.68%13.59% 14.36%10.31% 7. Taking into account the average GP rate which will be appliedin the present case will be 12 per cent. It is made clear that whereever the profit is more than 12 per cent, the same will not berefunded to the assessee but where it is less than 12 per cent, theincome will be assessed on the basis of 12 per cent GP. 08.In view of above, all the appeals stand allowed to theaforesaid extent. (VIJAY KUMAR VYAS),J. (K.S. JHAVERI),J. B.M. G. /Gourav-69-72