Tribunal limits addition for bogus purchases, aligns gross profit rates with genuine purchases

The tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment under Section 147, limited the addition for bogus purchases to Rs. 9,06,090/-, and dismissed the revenue's appeal for a higher addition. The tribunal's decision was based on the principle of bringing the gross profit rate of bogus purchases in line with that of genuine purchases, as established by the Bombay High Court.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Reopening of Assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Disallowance of alleged bogus purchases.
3. Quantum of addition for bogus purchases.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Reopening of Assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act:
The assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment, arguing that the notice under Section 148 was served beyond the prescribed time limit. The notice was issued on 07.10.2016 but was claimed to be received by the assessee only on 27.07.2017. The assessee contended that the assessment order was invalid due to the delayed service of the notice. However, the tribunal found that the notice dated 07.10.2016 was indeed served on the assessee on 16.02.2017, within the permissible time frame. The tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment, stating that the reasons recorded for reopening were sound and the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax was valid, showing application of mind. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the assessee's challenge to the reopening of the assessment.

2. Disallowance of Alleged Bogus Purchases:
The assessee was engaged in trading of iron and steel products and had declared purchases from four entities alleged to be hawala traders. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the entire amount of Rs. 26,25,58,657/- as bogus purchases, based on information from the Sales Tax Department and affidavits from the alleged hawala traders. The assessee provided audited accounts, tax audit reports, and bank statements to support the genuineness of the purchases. The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, confirming the addition of 12.5% of the total purchases as bogus, amounting to Rs. 3,28,19,832/-, and deleting the rest. The tribunal found that the purchases were debited in the books and the corresponding sales were credited, resulting in a gross profit of 0.09%. The tribunal held that the addition should be limited to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate on purchases at the same rate as other genuine purchases, following the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Mohammad Haji Adam And Co.

3. Quantum of Addition for Bogus Purchases:
The tribunal concluded that the addition should be based on the gross profit rate of genuine purchases. The gross profit rate on total purchases was 0.35%, while the gross profit rate on the alleged bogus purchases was 0.09%. The tribunal determined that the balance addition required to bring the gross profit rate of the bogus purchases to the rate of genuine purchases was Rs. 9,06,090/-. Therefore, the tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 9,06,090/- instead of the 12.5% confirmed by the CIT(A), and rejected the AO's addition of 100% of the bogus purchases. The tribunal dismissed the grounds raised by the revenue and partly allowed the assessee's appeal.

Conclusion:
The tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment under Section 147, limited the addition for bogus purchases to Rs. 9,06,090/-, and dismissed the revenue's appeal for a higher addition. The tribunal's decision was based on the principle of bringing the gross profit rate of bogus purchases in line with that of genuine purchases, as established by the Bombay High Court.

---