Person chargeable with duty must be the importer at importation; subsequent purchasers cannot be held liable where beneficial owner rules did not appl...
The Tribunal held that sales to the assessee's partnership firm were genuine because the alleged bogus-sales finding rested only on third-party statements, while GST returns, Form 26AS, ledger accounts and bank evidence consistently supported the transactions. It noted that corresponding purchases were accepted, stock reduced on sale, and no defect was found in the documentary records or any incriminating material in search. In the absence of material showing the transactions were sham, the Revenue could not estimate commission or profit at 8% on assumptions and conjecture. The addition based on alleged bogus sales was deleted and the appeal was partly allowed.
The Tribunal held that sales to the assessee's partnership firm were genuine because the alleged bogus-sales finding rested only on third-party statements, while GST returns, Form 26AS, ledger accounts and bank evidence consistently supported the transactions. It noted that corresponding purchases were accepted, stock reduced on sale, and no defect was found in the documentary records or any incriminating material in search. In the absence of material showing the transactions were sham, the Revenue could not estimate commission or profit at 8% on assumptions and conjecture. The addition based on alleged bogus sales was deleted and the appeal was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
