9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A)-20, Mumbai dated 10/11/2014 for the A.Y. 2010-11 in the matter of order passed U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). 2. In this appeal, the revenue is aggrieved for deletion of addition of Rs. 95,39,678/- on account of alleged bogus purchases. Even though the tax effect in respect of addition deleted by the CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt in the case of Pr.CIT Vs M/s Mohommad Haji Adam & Co. Income Tax Appeal No. 1004 of 2016 dated 11/02/2019, wherein it was held that the addition in respect of bogus purchases should be restricted to difference between the gross profit shown by the assessee in respect of bogus purchases vis a vis normal purchases. Meaning thereby the addition should be confined to gross profit shown on the bogus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee's sales. There was no discrepancy between the purchases shown by the assessee and the sales declared. That being the position, the Tribunal was correct in coming to the conclusion that the purchases cannot be rejected without disturbing the sales in case of a trader. The Tribunal, therefore, correctly restricted the additions limited to the extent of bringing the G.P. rate on purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have to reduce the selling price accordingly as a result of which profit comes to 5.66 %. Therefore, considering 5.66 % of Rs. 3,70,78,125/-which comes to Rs. 20,98,621.88 we think it fit to direct the revenue to add Rs. 20,98,621.88 as gross profit and make necessary deductions accordingly. Accordingly, the said question is answered partially in favour of the assessee and partially in favour of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
