9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claring 'nil' income. Subsequently an order under Section 143(1) of the Act dated 25th March 2011 was passed accepting the income returned by assessee. A further order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was passed on 27th March 2015 assessing income at Rs. 20,00,050/-. Assessing Officer ("AO") had made an addition of Rs. 1,97,35,311/- on account of bogus purchases and added the same to the total income. Assessee impugned the order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ("CIT(A)"), who allowed the Appeal on the ground that the addition was made only because the name of party appears in the list of Sales Tax Department and the party was not produced before AO. The Revenue challenged the order of CIT(A) passed on 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in directing the AO to restrict disallowance out of bogus/unproved purchases to 12.5% of such purchases without appreciating the fact that the assessee could not establish the genuineness of the transaction by producing 8 parties from whom purchases were stated to have been made and an independent enquiry conducted by the A.O. also revealed that these parties were non-existent and have been declared as Hawala Dealers by VAT department as they were found to be engaged in providing bogus bills without actual supply of goods and mere submission of copies of invoices, ledger account, bank statement etc. does not prove the genuineness of the transaction ? v. Whether on the facts and in circumstanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd also in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Smith P. Sheth 2013(356) ITR 451 (Guj.)., and held that no uniform yardstick can be applied for estimating gross profit on bogus purchases which is depending upon the facts of different cases. The 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. 9. Even on merits, the ITAT found that the approach of AO for re-opening the assessment was not correct. 10. We find that the view taken by the ITAT is a reasonable and possible view and hence, no substantial question of law ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
