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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Tribunal modifies disallowance percentage for alleged bogus purchases, upholding 12.5%</h1> <h3>Asst. CIT, Circle-1, Kalyan (W) Versus M/s. Thakor Electronics Ltd. And Vice-Versa</h3> The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal and dismissed the Revenue's appeals. The decision was based on the overall consideration of facts and ... Bogus purchases - disallowance of 25% out of hawala purchases should be done said by CIT-A - Held that:- Assessee has engaged into dealings in the grey market. Dealings in the grey market give the assessee various savings at the expense of the Exchequer. Hence, on the overall consideration of facts and circumstances and following the decision in the case of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth [2013 (10) TMI 1028 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] we hold that a disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchase would meet the end of justice - Decided partly in favour of assessee Issues involved:1. Validity of reopening u/s. 147 of the Act raised in assessee's appeal2. Sustenance of addition out of alleged bogus purchases by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in assessee's appeal3. Reduction of addition made by the Assessing Officer raised in Revenue's appealValidity of Reopening u/s. 147 of the Act:In the assessee's appeal, the first issue pertains to the validity of reopening u/s. 147 of the Act. The Counsel of the assessee decided not to press this ground, leading to the dismissal of the ground related to the validity of reopening.Sustenance of Addition from Alleged Bogus Purchases:The second issue raised in the assessee's appeal concerns the sustenance of addition from alleged bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer received information from the Sales Tax Department regarding purchases from suspicious parties who admitted to providing bills without delivering goods. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partially upheld the action, disallowing 25% of hawala purchases for one assessment year and confirming the disallowance for the other.Reduction of Addition Made by the Assessing Officer:In the Revenue's appeal, the issue raised was the reduction of the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was criticized for reducing the addition, with the Revenue contending that the reduction was erroneous.The Assessing Officer observed that the purchases from certain parties lacked credible documentary evidence and the appellant failed to provide substantial proof of the purchases' genuineness. Despite the appellant's claims of using raw materials in manufacturing goods, the lack of confirmations from the parties and unavailability of documentary evidence led to the conclusion that the purchases were inflated. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld part of the disallowance, considering the lack of evidence supporting the purchases.During the proceedings, it was noted that the parties providing bogus bills were non-existent, as confirmed by the Sales Tax Department. The assessing officer made necessary inquiries, issued notices to the parties (returned unserved), and found no evidence of goods provision or confirmations from the parties. The Tribunal emphasized that the purchases from non-existent parties could not be considered genuine, citing relevant legal precedents and decisions.Referring to legal precedents, the Tribunal highlighted the unsustainable nature of considering documents from non-existent parties as valid evidence of purchases. The Tribunal also considered the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, emphasizing the need for full disallowance in cases of bogus purchases. However, based on the specific circumstances of the case and previous rulings, the Tribunal decided on a 12.5% disallowance of the bogus purchases, modifying the lower authorities' orders accordingly.In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal and dismissed the Revenue's appeals. The decision was based on the overall consideration of facts and legal precedents, leading to the modification of the disallowance percentage for the alleged bogus purchases.This comprehensive analysis covers the issues of validity of reopening, sustenance of addition from alleged bogus purchases, and reduction of addition made by the Assessing Officer as addressed in the legal judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found