Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the addition on account of alleged bogus purchases was required to be sustained in full or could be restricted to a reasonable profit element where the corresponding sales were not doubted and the assessee had not substantiated the purchases.
Analysis: The assessee had failed to comply with notices and had not furnished supporting material before the Assessing Officer, who therefore proceeded on the basis of the information received from the Sales Tax Department and invoked best judgment assessment. In first appeal, it was found that the corresponding sales were not disputed and that complete disallowance of the purchases was not justified. The addition was therefore estimated at 15% of the impugned purchases as profit element, having regard to the gross profit shown and the nature of the material on record. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with that estimate, noting that the Revenue had not shown any infirmity in the approach adopted and that the sales side had not been disturbed.
Conclusion: The restriction of the addition to 15% of the alleged bogus purchases was sustained and the Revenue's challenge failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where purchases are treated as nongenuine but the corresponding sales are accepted, the addition is confined to a reasonable estimation of the profit element and not the entire purchase value.