IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA No. 7224/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s. R.A. Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-13(3)(1) 8-9, Kerkoo Bhai Indl. Estate Room No. 227, 2nd Floor Kheli Pada, Near Dhsisar Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Toll Naka, Dhaisar (E) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400068 PAN AACCR7517C Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Ajay Singh Respondent by: Shri D.G. Pansari Date of Hearing: 26.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 12.09.2019 ORDER Per Shamim Yahya, AM This appeal filed by Revenue is directed against order of CIT(A)-21, Mumbai dated 12.08.2016 and it relates to A.Y. 2009-10. 2. This appeal was earlier disposed of by ex-parte order dated 16.10.20916. Subsequently said order was recalled. Pursuant to said recall this appeal has been heard by us. 3. Brief facts of case are that return of income was filed on 24.09.2009 showing total income at `12,44,370/-. assessment was reopened by issue of notice under Section 148 of Income tax Act, 1916 (hereafter Act ) dated 10.03.2014. There was no previous scrutiny assessment in this case. Vide assessment order under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 dated 23.03.2015 income was assessed at `1,14,55,770/-. assessee company is engaged in business of trading of drugs and medicines. Assessing Officer called upon assessee to 2 ITA No. 7224/Mum/2016 M/s. R.A. Biotech Pvt. Ltd. establish genuineness of purchases from following parties from whom purchases were claimed to be made :- Sr. No. Name of party Amt. of purchase Pushphari Electricals 85 6295361 1. Engineers Pvt. Ltd. 2. Grifton India / Riddhi Enterprise 1250460 3. Status Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. 2665576 Total- 10211397 On failure of Assessee to produce parties and also genuineness of transaction, Assessing Officer disallowed purchases amounting to `1,02,11,397/- in assessment order. 4. Upon assessee's appeal learned CIT(A) confirmed same. He inter- alia noted that there was no response from assessee. 5. Against above order assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both counsels and perused records. Learned counsel of assessee contended that there was reasonable cause why assessee could not be represented properly before authorities below. He submitted that assessee was involved in some case and was not in position to properly pursue appeal. Learned counsel of assessee further submitted that 3 parties with reference to which it has been alleged that assessee was engaged into bogus purchases are not at all parties of assessee. In this regard he sought to submit certain additional documents. These documents were not before authorities below. 6. Upon careful consideration in our considered opinion interest of justice will be served if issue is remitted to file of Assessing Officer. Assessing Officer is directed to consider issue afresh taking into account for consideration and verification additional evidences being 3 ITA No. 7224/Mum/2016 M/s. R.A. Biotech Pvt. Ltd. submitted by assessee. Both counsels fairly agreed to above proposition. 7. In result this appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in open court on 12th September, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravish Sood) (Shamim Yahya) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai, Dated: 12th September, 2019 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) -21, Mumbai 4. Pr.CIT - 13, Mumbai 5. DR, D Bench, ITAT, Mumbai By Order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai n.p. R.A. Biotech Pvt. Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer- 13(3)(1), Mumbai