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>Tribunal limits disallowance to 6% of purchases, ruling in favor of appellant.</h1> <h3>The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3 (3), Surat. Versus M/s. DN Jewels</h3> The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3 (3), Surat. Versus M/s. DN Jewels - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance of non-genuine purchases2. Justification of disallowance percentage3. Comparison with previous case lawAnalysis:1. The appeal pertains to the disallowance of non-genuine purchases amounting to Rs. 2,49,88,345, reduced by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to Rs. 12,49,417. The Assessing Officer made the original addition based on unverifiable purchases from a supplier involved in issuing bogus bills. The appellant contested the CIT(A)'s decision, arguing for a deletion of the entire addition.2. The key contention revolved around the percentage of disallowance, with the appellant advocating for a restriction up to the gross profit declared in audited financial statements. The Tribunal referred to a previous judgment in a similar case, where a 12.5% disallowance was reduced to 6% based on the circumstances and industry standards. The Tribunal upheld the 6% disallowance, considering the low Gross Profit Rate of the appellant.3. The Tribunal compared the present case with the precedent set by the Hon'ble High Court in a similar matter involving Mayank Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal noted the differences in Gross Profit Rates between the cases, leading to the decision to sustain the disallowance at 6% for the appellant. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering industry standards and the specific circumstances of each case in determining the appropriate disallowance percentage.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partly allowed the appellant's appeal by restricting the disallowance to 6% of the impugned purchases. This decision was based on a thorough analysis of the facts, industry standards, and relevant case law, ensuring a fair and just outcome in line with established legal principles.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
