2018 (9) TMI 1982 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal decision: Partial appeal success on bogus purchases, VAT verification ordered

Kanak Steel India, Mumbai Versus Income tax officer - Ward 18 (2) (1), Mumbai

The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal challenging the addition of Rs. 1,15,990 on account of bogus purchases for the assessment year 2011-12. The ... Bogus purchases - AO restricted the addition to 12.5% Kanak Steel India being the profit element embedded in nongenuine purchase also confirmed by CIT-A - only submission of assessee that he has paid VAT on the alleged bogus purchases, therefore, even if the profit element on the alleged bogus purchases is estimated at 12.5% but the VAT amount paid by the assessee should be reduced from such profit - HELD THAT:- Assessee should get the benefit of VAT paid on the purchases held to be nongenuine by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, direct the Assessing Officer to verify the payment of VAT by the assessee and reduce it from the addition made of ₹ 1,15,990 and sustain addition to the extent of the balance amount. This ground is partly allowed. Levy of interest u/s 234C - HELD THAT:- Levy of interest is mandatory and consequential. Suffice to say, interest under section 234C of the Act has to be charged on the basis of income returned by the assessee. Issues involved:Challenging order dated 7th November 2017 by Commissioner (Appeals) for assessment year 2011-12, addition of Rs. 1,15,990 on account of bogus purchases, benefit of VAT paid on alleged bogus purchases, levy of interest under various provisions of the Act.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for the assessment year 2011-12. Grounds 1 to 4 were not pressed and hence dismissed.2. Ground no. 5 involved the challenge against the addition of Rs. 1,15,990 on account of bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment based on information received regarding purchases from a specific entity being non-genuine. Despite the assessee providing documentation, the Assessing Officer was not convinced and treated the purchases as non-genuine. However, considering the purchases were reflected in the books and necessary for sales, the addition was restricted to the profit element of 12.5%.3. The assessee challenged the addition before the first appellate authority but was unsuccessful. The argument was made that the VAT paid on the alleged bogus purchases should be considered to reduce the profit element estimated at 12.5%.4. The Tribunal considered the submissions and directed the Assessing Officer to verify the VAT payment by the assessee and reduce it from the addition made, sustaining the addition to the extent of the balance amount. This ground was partly allowed.5. Ground no. 6 involved the challenge against the levy of interest under various provisions of the Act. The Tribunal noted that the levy of interest is mandatory and consequential, with interest under section 234C being charged based on the income returned by the assessee.6. Grounds no. 7 and 8 were dismissed, with one being premature and the other being of a general nature. The result was that the assessee's appeal was partly allowed, with the order pronounced in open court on 19.09.2018.