TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Appeals Outcome: Assessee partially wins, Revenue dismissed; Tribunal stresses profit estimation & section 14A compliance.</h1> <h3>Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax – 5 (1) (2), Mumbai Versus M/s. Choron Diamond (I) Pvt. Ltd. And Vice-Versa</h3> Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax – 5 (1) (2), Mumbai Versus M/s. Choron Diamond (I) Pvt. Ltd. And Vice-Versa - Tmi Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of purchases as non-genuine.2. Reopening of assessments based on information from DGIT(Investigation).3. Estimation of profit element in non-genuine purchases.4. Disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D.Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Purchases as Non-Genuine:The assessee challenged the disallowance of purchases by the Ld.CIT(A) at 4% for AY 2007-08 and 3% for AYs 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2013-14. The Revenue also filed appeals against the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the disallowance to these percentages. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated the entire purchases as non-genuine for AY 2007-08 and 12.5% as non-genuine for other years, based on statements from key persons in the Rajendra Jain group, who admitted to providing accommodation entries without real business transactions. The Ld.CIT(A) upheld the AO's action but estimated the profit element in the purchases at lower percentages, citing the Gujarat High Court decisions in CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. and CIT v. Simit P. Seth.2. Reopening of Assessments Based on Information from DGIT(Investigation):The assessments were reopened under section 147 based on information that the assessee was a beneficiary of bogus purchases from entities managed by the Rajendra Jain group. The group admitted to providing accommodation entries and not engaging in real trading. The AO, not convinced by the assessee's submissions and lack of delivery challans, concluded that the purchases were bogus and made in the gray market.3. Estimation of Profit Element in Non-Genuine Purchases:The AO estimated a 12.5% Gross Profit Margin on the non-genuine purchases for AYs 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2013-14, while treating the entire purchases as non-genuine for AY 2007-08. The Ld.CIT(A) reduced the profit element to 4% for AY 2007-08 and 3% for the other years, considering the CBDT Instructions and various case laws. The Tribunal further directed the AO to estimate the profit element at 2% uniformly for all the years, considering the Task Group for Diamond Sector's report, which suggested a profit margin of 1% to 3% in diamond trading.4. Disallowance Under Section 14A Read with Rule 8D:For AYs 2008-09 and 2013-14, the assessee contested the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D, arguing it should not exceed the dividend income earned. The Tribunal, following the decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Delhi High Court, directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to the dividend income of Rs. 38,380 and Rs. 11,180 for the respective years.Conclusion:The appeals of the assessee for AYs 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2013-14 were partly allowed, while those for AYs 2010-11 and 2011-12 were dismissed. The Revenue's appeals for AYs 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2011-12 were dismissed. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the need for a reasonable estimation of profit elements in non-genuine purchases and adherence to judicial precedents in disallowance under section 14A.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
