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 Adjusts Profit Margin on Non-Genuine Purchases to 6% for Multiple Assessment Years.</h1> <h3>Maxell Diamond Private Limited Versus ITO-5 (2) (3), Mumbai</h3> The tribunal partially allowed the appeals for AY 2008-09, 2011-12, and 2014-15, directing the AO to estimate a 6% profit margin on alleged non-genuine ... Bogus purchases - Addition on the basis of information gathered during the course of search and survey in the cases of accommodation entry providers giving bogus purchase bills to various parties and the assessee being one of the beneficiary of accommodation entry - AO as well as the ld. CIT(A) has estimated 8% profit - HELD THAT:- ITAT, in the case of Renisha Impex Pvt.Ltd. [2017 (10) TMI 1509 - ITAT MUMBAI] has considered an identical issue and directed the AO to estimate 6% profit on alleged non-genuinene purchases. In yet another case, the ITAT, Mumbai Bench in case of M/s Decent Dia Jewel Pvt Ltd [2020 (2) TMI 137 - ITAT MUMBAI] has taken similar view and estimated 6% profit on alleged non-genuine purchases. We, therefore, considereing facts and circumstances of this case and by following the case laws discussed herein above, direct the ld. AO to estimate 6% profit on alleged non-genuine purchases. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Addition of Rs. 57,81,073 to the total income based on alleged bogus purchase transactions.2. Assumption of jurisdiction by the AO for initiating reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Addition of Rs. 57,81,073 to the Total Income:The assessee, engaged in trading cut and polished diamonds, filed returns for AY 2008-09, declaring an income of Rs. 1,24,680. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, with a determined income of Rs. 2,16,130. The case was reopened based on information from DIT (Investigation)-II, indicating that the assessee benefited from bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs. 6,61,52,954 from hawala dealers. The AO completed the reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147, determining the total income at Rs. 59,97,203, including an 8% profit margin addition on alleged bogus purchases.The assessee appealed, arguing that the AO erred in adding purchases from certain parties based on statements recorded during searches, despite providing necessary evidence to justify the purchases. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's addition, referencing the Task Force group's recommendations for the diamond industry and various judicial precedents. The CIT(A) noted that the profit element embedded in bogus purchases should be assessed as undisclosed income, with the AO's 8% profit rate deemed reasonable based on industry standards and judicial decisions.2. Assumption of Jurisdiction by the AO:The assessee contended that the AO's initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 148 was legally flawed. The CIT(A) and the tribunal did not explicitly address this issue in their detailed findings, focusing instead on the substantive issue of the profit margin on alleged bogus purchases.Tribunal's Findings:The tribunal reviewed the material and arguments, noting that the AO's findings were based on extensive evidence, including the modus operandi of entry providers and statements from the Bhanwarlal Jain group. The CIT(A) supported the AO's conclusions, noting that the findings were corroborated by incriminating material seized during searches. The tribunal acknowledged the CIT(A)'s reliance on the Task Force group's recommendations and judicial precedents, but noted that the task force recommended a 2%-3% profit margin, while the AO and CIT(A) estimated 8%.The tribunal cited ITAT decisions in similar cases, directing the AO to estimate a 6% profit on alleged non-genuine purchases, aligning with precedents such as Renisha Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Decent Dia Jewel Pvt. Ltd.Conclusion:The tribunal partly allowed the appeals for AY 2008-09, 2011-12, and 2014-15, directing the AO to estimate a 6% profit on alleged non-genuine purchases, consistent with judicial precedents. The order was pronounced on 29/01/2020.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found