TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of different cases. ITAT held that the Co-ordinate Bench in number of cases has taken a consistent view and directed AO to estimate gross profit of 12.5% on alleged bogus purchases and therefore, in the case at hand also directed AO to estimate gross profit at 12.5% on the bogus purchases. Thus view taken by the ITAT is a reasonable and possible view and hence, no substantial question of law arises - K.R. SHRIRAM DR. N. K. GOKHALE, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Suresh Kumar. For the Respondent : None present. P.C. : 1. Mr. Suresh Kumar states that Respondent has been served. Respondent, however, is absent. 2. This is an Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) filed by the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be incurred at all, least of all that the same is also not laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business is not admissible in terms of the provisions of Section 37 of the Act ? ii. Whether prejudice to ground no. 1 above, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT is justified in taking only 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases as income and thus allowing 87.5% of such total amount of purchases as expenditure in contravention of the provisions of Section iii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT is justified in allowing the relief to the assessee ignoring the judgment of Hon ble Apex Court in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ross profit on alleged bogus purchases based on the information received from the Investigation Wing which stated that assessee was one of the beneficiaries of bogus purchase bills obtained through hawala operators. AO was of the opinion that though assessee furnished certain documents to justify purchases, it failed to produce the parties in person. 7. It is assessee s case that just because the party did not appear in person before AO, the genuineness of purchases can not be doubted when all details are furnished to justify the purchases. It is also assessee s case that it had declared the gross profit of 30.12% which was higher than the gross profit declared in similar line of business and AO was not justified in estimating the gross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
