ITAT allows appeal, limits disallowance to 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases.

The ITAT partly allowed the appeal, modifying the Ld. CIT(A)'s order by restricting the disallowance to 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. The ITAT considered the documentary evidence provided by the assessee but drew adverse inference due to the absence of suppliers. It noted that since sales were not doubted, a hundred percent disallowance was not justified. The ITAT referenced a jurisdictional High Court precedent and decided that the 12.5% disallowance, taking into account the declared gross profit rate, was appropriate in this case to address potential tax evasion concerns.

---

---

Issues:
- Disallowance on account of bogus purchases
- Applicability of percentage disallowance
- Consideration of gross profit rate in disallowance calculation

Analysis:
1. The main issue in this case revolves around the disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchases, with the Assessing Officer making a 12.5% addition amounting to Rs.10,85,600. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, leading to the appeal before the ITAT by the assessee.

2. During the appeal, the assessee argued that necessary documentary evidence for the purchases was available, citing a decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in support of the case. The High Court's decision emphasized the importance of documentary evidence in such cases.

3. The ITAT, after careful consideration, noted that while the assessee provided documentary evidence for the purchases, adverse inference was drawn due to the inability to produce the suppliers. However, it was observed that the sales were not doubted, leading to the conclusion that a hundred percent disallowance for bogus purchases was not warranted.

4. The ITAT referred to a precedent set by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in a similar case where a hundred percent allowance for purchases said to be bogus was upheld when sales were not doubted. However, in the present case, the purchases were made from the grey market, indicating potential tax evasion.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT decided that a 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases would meet the ends of justice. The ITAT also considered the argument raised by the assessee's counsel regarding the taxation of profits earned on these transactions.

6. Ultimately, the ITAT modified the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and directed that the disallowance be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchases, taking into account the gross profit rate already declared by the assessee on these transactions. If the declared gross profit rate covers the disallowance rate, no further disallowance is required.

7. The appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed based on the modifications made by the ITAT, providing a nuanced approach to the disallowance issue while considering the specific circumstances of the case and the applicability of the gross profit rate in the calculation.

---