2013 (8) TMI 80 - HC - Income Tax

Revenue's additions on bogus purchases and brokerage disallowed where account-payee cheques and ledger support payments

HC upheld the Tribunal and decided against the revenue on both points. On bogus purchases, HC found payments made by crossed/account-payee cheques, no ... Bogus purchases - Tribunal held that purchases are not bogus since there are entries in books of accounts for them - Held that:- Assessee had made payment through crossed cheques and assessing officer did not find that payment made came back to assessee. Assessing Officer has made addition in respect to the outstanding amount as on 31.3.2001 which has been cleared in the succeeding years. The ratio of the creditor to the purchases is normal considering the past records of the assessee - The issue is essentially based on facts - no question of law arises - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of brokerage commission - CIT sustained addition - Tribunal deleted addition due to lack of evidence - Held that:- Assessee made payment of commission through account payee cheques for sales canvassed by the party and also in consideration of the collection recovered from purchaser. Payments cannot be unreasonable particularly when M/s. Shree Shantinath Silk Industries is not related to the assessee and so even disallowance made by CIT(A) is not proper - The issue is essentially based on facts - no question of law arises - Decided against revenue. Issues:1. Addition sustained by the Appellate Commissioner on unverifiable purchases2. Disallowance sustained by the Appellate Commissioner on brokerage commissionAnalysis:Issue 1: Addition on unverifiable purchasesThe primary issue in this case revolved around the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unverifiable purchases. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 1.27 crores to the total amount, considering the purchases as bogus due to the inability to locate the parties involved. However, the CIT(A) and subsequently the Tribunal took a different view. The CIT(A) noted that corresponding sales were made by the respondent in the following year, and historical data showed similar purchases that were never questioned. The Tribunal, after examining the evidence presented, found that the purchases were supported by bills, account entries, and payments made through cheques. It was observed that there was no inflation in prices, and the creditors' ratio was normal based on past records. The Tribunal ultimately concluded that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was unjustified and deleted the same.Issue 2: Disallowance on brokerage commissionThe second issue pertained to the disallowance of brokerage commission amounting to Rs. 72,37,808 by the Assessing Officer. The disallowance was based on the lack of records and absence of the party's name on the sales bill of M/s. Shree Shantinath Silk Industries. The CIT(A) partially sustained the disallowance, reducing it to Rs. 36.18 lakhs. However, the Tribunal, upon review, found no evidence to suggest that the commission expenses were bogus. It was noted that the payments were made through account payee cheques for sales facilitated by the party, and there was no indication of unreasonableness in the payments. The Tribunal disagreed with the CIT(A)'s decision and deleted the entire disallowance, emphasizing that the expenses were genuine and properly accounted for.In both issues, the Tribunal's decisions were based on a thorough examination of the facts and evidence presented. The Tribunal found no legal grounds to sustain the additions or disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). As a result, the Tax appeal challenging these decisions was dismissed, with the Tribunal emphasizing that no substantial questions of law arose from the factual findings.