Tribunal deletes peak addition for bogus purchases and short yield addition due to incorrect calculations

ITAT Raipur ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, the tribunal upheld CIT(Appeals) decision to delete peak addition for bogus purchases, finding no justification since payments were made from disclosed bank accounts rather than unaccounted money. Peak addition concept applies only when purchases are made from undisclosed sources. Second, the tribunal confirmed deletion of addition for alleged short yield of rice, noting the AO incorrectly calculated yield at 61.30% instead of actual 68.25% (including broken rice), which exceeded government norms of 67-68%.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Bogus Purchases
2. Peak Credit Addition
3. Short Yield of Rice

Summary:

1. Bogus Purchases:

The revenue challenged the deletion of Rs. 26,76,511/- out of Rs. 34,52,750/- added by the AO for bogus purchases. The AO had disallowed 25% of the value of bogus purchases, but the CIT(A) scaled it down to 3.26%, the overall disclosed GP rate of the assessee. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the Bombay High Court's ruling in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-17 Vs. M/s. Mohhomad Haji Adam & Company, which stated that the addition should bring the GP rate of bogus purchases to the same rate as genuine purchases. The Tribunal found that the purchase rates of the bogus purchases were lower than the genuine purchases, thus no addition was justified. The Tribunal directed the AO to vacate the addition of Rs. 7,76,239/-.

2. Peak Credit Addition:

The revenue contested the deletion of Rs. 16,43,550/- added by the AO as peak credit of purchases from six bogus parties. The CIT(A) vacated the addition, noting that the payments were made through disclosed bank accounts, and the peak concept was not applicable. The Tribunal concurred with the CIT(A), stating that the addition was unsustainable as the purchases were made from disclosed sources. The AO was directed to vacate the addition.

3. Short Yield of Rice:

The revenue disputed the deletion of Rs. 1,49,79,900/- added by the AO for short yield of rice. The AO had calculated the yield at 61.30%, below the state government norm of 67%-68%. The CIT(A) found the actual yield to be 68.25% after including broken rice (kanka) and vacated the addition. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the yield was within the accepted levels and consistent with previous years' assessments.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and disposed of the assessee's appeal, directing the AO to vacate the additions as per the CIT(A)'s findings. The order was pronounced under rule 34(4) of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

---