Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Anju Jindal

2016 (11) TMI 793 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Bogus purchases - proof of genuinity of expenditure - Held that:- The books of account of the assessee, which were duly audited as per provisions of the Act, were found to be not questioned by the Assessing Officer. Although the Assessing Officer ordered deletion of the purchases made from the afore-referred to five creditors, he was found to have taken a self-contradictory stand of accepting the total declared sales of the assessee of over ₹ 2.17 crores, as also the expenses debited to th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cer was found to have the necessary particulars regarding the above referred to five creditors, but for the reasons best known to him, he did not summon any of them. More importantly, the Tribunal noted that for all the purchases ordered to be disallowed by the Assessing Officer, payments had been made by the assessee through account payee cheques, which remained unquestioned by the Assessing Officer. The creditors, having been paid through account payee cheques could thus have easily been trace .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

"A", New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ). 2. The matter in question pertains to the assessment year 2007-08. In the appeal, the following question of law, among others, has been raised : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the decision of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,33,29,548 made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases esp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

granted, none of the afore-referred five creditors/vendors had been produced by the assessee and no reason for the same had been offered. 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Faridabad and the Tribunal, after examination of the entire record, inter alia, noted that for the assessment year in question, the assessee had declared sales of over ₹ 2.17 crores, as also gross profit at 2.69 per cent. against the sales of about ₹ 1.16 crores with gross profit at 2.98 per cent. for t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version