Disallowances for bogus purchases enhancing business income eligible for section 80IA deduction confirmed

ITAT Mumbai held that disallowances for bogus purchases, which enhanced business income, were eligible for deduction under section 80IA. The AO rejected the assessee's explanation regarding purchases from parties and made additions by applying gross profit rates and treating transactions as bogus. CIT(A) allowed section 80IA deduction on these additions following CBDT Circular No.37 of 2016, reasoning that disallowances related to business activity qualify for the deduction. ITAT confirmed CIT(A)'s order, deciding against revenue.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of disallowance made u/s 80IA.
2. Eligibility for deduction u/s 80IA for a work contractor.
3. Treatment of bogus purchases.

Summary:

Issue 1: Deletion of Disallowance Made u/s 80IA
The Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance made u/s 80IA, arguing that the assessee did not claim the deduction in the return filed u/s 153A. The CIT(A) had allowed the deduction based on past precedents and CBDT Circular No. 37 of 2016, which permitted deductions on enhanced income/additions. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the assessee was consistently allowed the deduction in previous years, and there was no change in facts or circumstances.

Issue 2: Eligibility for Deduction u/s 80IA for a Work Contractor
The Revenue contended that the assessee was merely a work contractor and not a developer, thus not eligible for deduction u/s 80IA. The CIT(A) and Tribunal referred to earlier decisions, including those of the ITAT and CIT(A), which had consistently held that the assessee was eligible for the deduction. The Tribunal confirmed that the assessee's status as a developer had been established in previous rulings, and there were no new facts to warrant a different conclusion.

Issue 3: Treatment of Bogus Purchases
The AO had treated purchases from M/s. Pankaj Metal Centre Pvt. Ltd. as bogus, leading to an addition to the assessee's income. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition on merits but allowed the deduction u/s 80IA on the enhanced income, following the CBDT Circular and past precedents. The Tribunal agreed, noting that the additions were related to business activity and thus eligible for the deduction. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order and confirmed it.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, confirming the CIT(A)'s decision to allow the deduction u/s 80IA on the enhanced income, in line with past precedents and the CBDT Circular. The order was pronounced on 21st May, 2024.

---