Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2017 (12) TMI 52 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal orders fresh assessment by AO, allowing appeals for statistical purposes, ensuring natural justice The Tribunal set aside the matter to the AO for de novo determination, directing necessary enquiries and providing the assessee with an opportunity for ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal orders fresh assessment by AO, allowing appeals for statistical purposes, ensuring natural justice

                            The Tribunal set aside the matter to the AO for de novo determination, directing necessary enquiries and providing the assessee with an opportunity for rebuttal, including cross-examination if required. Both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue were allowed for statistical purposes, with a fresh assessment by the AO mandated, ensuring adherence to the principles of natural justice.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Addition of 3% of alleged bogus purchases.
                            2. Non-consideration of explanations, affidavits, and relevant documents by the CIT(A).
                            3. Justification of CIT(A) in sustaining the addition to the extent of only 3% instead of 8%.
                            4. Reliance on statements and evidence from third parties.
                            5. Rejection of books of accounts by the AO.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Addition of 3% of Alleged Bogus Purchases:
                            The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 53,54,962/- at 3% of alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 17,84,98,737/-, arguing that the CIT(A) erred in confirming this addition without considering the facts and merits of the case. The Revenue, on the other hand, appealed against the CIT(A) for reducing the addition from 8% to 3%.

                            2. Non-Consideration of Explanations, Affidavits, and Relevant Documents:
                            The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not consider the explanations, affidavits, confirmations, and other relevant documents submitted during the assessment and appeal proceedings. These documents were intended to support the genuineness of the alleged bogus purchases. The CIT(A) was criticized for not understanding the merits and value of these documents.

                            3. Justification of CIT(A) in Sustaining the Addition to the Extent of Only 3% Instead of 8%:
                            The CIT(A) restricted the addition to 3% of the total alleged bogus purchases, considering the lesser profit margin in the diamond trade sector. The CIT(A) referred to the task force group for the diamond industry, which recommended a presumptive tax for net profit calculated at 2% for trading activity and 3% for manufacturing activity. The CIT(A) also noted that the AO's estimation of an 8% profit margin was not based on a correct footing.

                            4. Reliance on Statements and Evidence from Third Parties:
                            The AO relied on statements given during the search and survey operations on the Bhanwarlal Jain group, which indicated that the suppliers were merely name lenders and the actual management was by Bhanwarlal Jain and his family. The AO concluded that the purchases were made from the grey market, and the assessee benefited from the additional GP margin. The CIT(A) concurred with this view, stating that the onus was on the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions.

                            5. Rejection of Books of Accounts by the AO:
                            The AO rejected the assessee's books of accounts under Section 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concluding that the purchases were not genuine. The AO estimated the profit margin embedded in the alleged bogus purchases at 8%, which was later reduced to 3% by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) noted that the AO did not make independent verifications or issue notices under Sections 133(6)/131 of the Act.

                            Tribunal's Decision:
                            The tribunal noted that the assessee submitted affidavits, confirmations, tax returns, and audited financial statements of the suppliers only at the fag-end of the assessment proceedings. The AO did not have sufficient time to verify these documents. The tribunal observed that the AO did not make any independent enquiries and relied solely on the investigation conducted by DGIT(Inv), Mumbai. The tribunal set aside the matter to the AO for de novo determination, directing the AO to conduct necessary enquiries and provide the assessee with an opportunity for rebuttal, including cross-examination of Bhanwarlal Jain if required.

                            Conclusion:
                            The tribunal allowed both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue for statistical purposes, directing a fresh assessment by the AO with proper enquiries and adherence to the principles of natural justice.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found