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>ITAT partially allows appeal on bogus purchases, emphasizes evidence & profit element substantiation</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income tax-5 (1) (2), Mumbai Versus M/s Creative Peripherals And Distribution Pvt. Ltd.</h3> Deputy Commissioner of Income tax-5 (1) (2), Mumbai Versus M/s Creative Peripherals And Distribution Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:Disallowed purchases claimed by the assessee due to lack of evidence and genuineness.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Disallowance of PurchasesThe case involved an appeal by the revenue against an order passed by the CIT(A)-20, Mumbai, related to the disallowance of purchases made by the assessee company in the A.Y 2009-10. The assessee had declared a total income of &8377;1,35,46,240, but the AO disallowed purchases amounting to &8377;1,01,67,848 due to lack of evidence and genuineness. The AO could not verify the purchases' authenticity as confirmations from the parties were not obtained, and the assessee failed to produce necessary documentary evidence. The AO concluded that the parties were non-genuine, and no purchases were made. The CIT(A) agreed that the purchases were bogus but restricted the addition to 6% of the value as a profit element. The revenue appealed this decision.Issue 2: Judicial InterpretationThe ITAT Mumbai, after hearing both parties, observed that while the assessee failed to prove purchases from specific parties, the stock register and cheque payments indicated actual receipt of goods. The ITAT concluded that the assessee made purchases from the open/grey market, not the mentioned parties. Therefore, the addition should be restricted to the profit element involved. However, the ITAT disagreed with the CIT(A)'s quantification of the profit element at 6% and referred to a Gujarat High Court case where the profit element was determined at 12.5% of the bogus purchases' value. The ITAT upheld the addition of &8377;12,70,956 (12.5% of &8377;1,01,67,648) for the bogus purchases.Conclusion:The ITAT partly allowed the revenue's appeal, sustaining the addition of &8377;12,70,956 for the bogus purchases. The judgment clarified the need for evidence to substantiate purchases and the quantification of the profit element involved in such transactions based on judicial precedents.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
