The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 5412 (Mum-Trib)

IN THE ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH

SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M. & RAMLAL NEGI, J.M.

Riddhi Siddhi Construction v. DCIT

I.T.A. No. 7196/Mum/2017

A.Y. 2010-11

16 September, 2020

Assessee by: S. Devendra Jain

Department by: V. Vinod Kumar

ORDER

Shamim Yahya, A.M.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), dated 14-6-2017 and pertains to assessment year 2010-11.

2. The grounds of appeal read as under :--

1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 56,17,397 being alleged hawala purchases, merely on the basis of alleged statement given to sales tax department, without providing an opportunity to cross examine those parties, disregarding the law laid down by Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) : 1980 TaxPub(DT) 1130 (SC) and Andaman Timber Industries v. Commr. of Central Excise (Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006.) : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 5186 (SC) and Bombay High Court in the case of H.R. Mehta v. ACIT (2016) 72 taxmann.com 110 (Bombay) : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 3524 (Bom-HC) and CIT v. Ashish International (Bom HC -IT Appeal No. 4299 of 2009).

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT