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
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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>Gross profit estimated at 12.5% on alleged bogus purchases upheld despite supplier address discrepancies</h1> ITAT Ahmedabad upheld CIT(A)'s decision estimating gross profit at 12.5% on alleged bogus purchases. The assessee provided different addresses for ... Estimation of income - bogus purchases - estimation of gross profit at 12.5% by CIT(A) - HELD THAT:- It is seen from the assessment order that the assessee after providing different addresses in invoices and ITR’s in the case of M/s. Prince Sales Corporation and M/s. Perfect Steel Corporation. Though the assessee requested to issue notices u/s. 133(6) to the additional two addresses, however the A.O. has not issued summons to the parties. Even in case the sellers who failed to furnish reply to the notices issued by the AO, that cannot be a ground to hold that the genuine purchases made by the assessee from them to be treated as bogus purchases. It is seen from the appellate order, the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly considered the above issue in detail and then following judgments of Jurisdictional High Court and Tribunal made an average disallowance of 12.5% on the alleged bogus purchases made by the assessee. This conclusion arrived by the Ld. CIT(A) in our considered view is found to be reasonable, since the average Gross Profit for the three years comes to 10.77%. CIT(A) has exhaustively discussed the matter and decided the appeal on the basis of finding of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Simit Sheth (2013 (10) TMI 1028 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) and other case laws. No distinguishable material has been produced before us by the Revenue, thus the factual position remains the same. Thus we are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order judiciously and correctly which does not require any interference and the estimation of gross profit at 12.5% is hereby confirmed. Issues Involved:1. Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.2. Addition in respect of purchases held to be bogus.3. Confirmation of addition/disallowance of bogus purchases to the extent of profit at 12.5%.Summary:Issue 1: Reopening of AssessmentThe Assessee did not press the ground regarding the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.Issue 2: Addition in Respect of Bogus PurchasesThe Assessing Officer (A.O.) disallowed the entire purchase amount of Rs. 2,82,87,252/- as bogus, treating it as the income of the assessee. This decision was based on the lack of proper response from suppliers to summons issued under section 133(6) and the A.O.'s conclusion that the purchases were merely accommodation entries. The assessee provided various details to support the purchases, including addresses, phone numbers, PAN, VAT numbers, and bank account details, but the A.O. did not cross-verify these details.Issue 3: Confirmation of Addition/Disallowance of Bogus PurchasesThe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] partly allowed the assessee's appeal by estimating a disallowance of 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. The CIT(A) reasoned that while the purchases from certain parties could not be fully established as genuine, the sales were not in doubt, and some element of unverifiable purchases could not be ruled out. The CIT(A) relied on various judgments, including those of the Gujarat High Court, which held that when sales are not in doubt, the entire purchases cannot be disallowed, but rather the profit element embedded in such purchases could be disallowed.Appeals by Assessee and Revenue:Both the Assessee and Revenue filed cross appeals. The Assessee contested the 12.5% disallowance, arguing that the Gross Profit (G.P.) declared on work-in-progress and sales in respective assessment years was fair and reasonable. The Revenue argued that the entire amount of bogus purchases should be added back to the income.Tribunal's Decision:The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming the disallowance of 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s conclusion reasonable, noting that the average Gross Profit for the three years was 10.77%. The Tribunal also considered various case laws supporting the view that only the profit element in such purchases should be added to the income, not the entire purchase amount. The Tribunal dismissed both the Assessee's and Revenue's appeals.Conclusion:The Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s estimation of gross profit at 12.5% on the alleged bogus purchases, dismissing the cross-appeals filed by both the Assessee and Revenue for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2017-18. The order was pronounced in the open court on 31-10-2023.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found