9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1961 (the act) was partly allowed. Therefore, the assessing officer is aggrieved and is in appeal before us. 2. The solitary ground of the appeal of the learned assessing officer is that the learned CIT - A has erred in restricting the disallowance to 25% of purchases instead of hundred percent of purchases of Rs. 777,174/- from non-existent vendor's by not following the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in case of NK proteins Ltd versus DCIT where in it has been held that once the purchases are bogus, the addition should be made on the entire purchases and not only the profit embedded in such purchases against which the specially petition filed by the assessee was dismissed by the honourable Supreme Court in (2017) 292 CT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the assessee as well as transported by way of a sale to other parties. Accordingly, the assessment order was passed under section 143 read with section 147 of the act on 19/2/2015 wherein the 100 % percent of the bogus purchases of Rs. 777,174/- was added to the total income of the assessee under section 69C of the act to the returned income of Rs. 202,640/- and the total income was assessed at Rs. 979,814/-. 4. The assessee aggrieved with the assessment order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT A, who passed an appellate order on 29/5/2023 wherein he is following the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in case of Vijay proteins Ltd versus ACIT restricted the addition to the extent of 25% of bogus purchases. The lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court in case of M/s Vijay Proteins Limited retained the addition only to the extent of 25% of bogus purchases. We find that in the case of NK proteins, honourable Gujarat High Court followed the decision of M/s Vijay Proteins Ltd and further in both the cases the addition was restricted to the extent of 25% of the bogus purchases only. Therefore, the grounds of appeal preferred by the learned assessing officer are misplaced. Accordingly same is dismissed as we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT - A in restricting the addition of bogus purchases to the extent of 25% of such bogus purchases.
8. In the result appeal of the AO is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th June 2024. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
