TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 50
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g out of the Judgment and Order dated 28.03.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat (for short 'the Tribunal') in ITA No. 373/SRT/2023 in respect of the Assessment Year 2012-2013:- a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has justified in dismissing the appeal of the Revenue against the decision of the Tribunal in deleting the addition made by the AO at the rate of 100% of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 116,49,88,059/- ignoring the fact that these purchases are sham transactions fabricated through bogus paper concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain Group companies which were engaged in providing accommodation entries? b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in dismissing the appeal of the revenue wherein the AO has made 100% addition of bogus transaction amounting to Rs. 116,49,88,059/- made by the Assessee with the entry provider not appreciating that non-genuineness of the expenditure booked was established by the information received from DIT(Inv)-II, Mumbai and the Assessee was not able to discharge its onus to establish the genuineness of transaction before the AO as well as before the Ld CIT(A)?" 3. Brief facts of the case are that: 3.1 The respondent-assessee filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2012-13 on 26.7.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 1,76,510/-. The return of income was processed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rein it was held that in respect of bogus purchases, the addition at the rate of 6% of bogus purchases is fair and reasonable. 5. Considering the above submissions, the relevant extract of order of Coordinate Bench in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Pankaj K. Choudhary (Supra) is reproduced herein below: "5. The Assessing Officer noticed the contentions of the assessee that confirmation, purchase bills, bank statement, stock register, copy of ITR were already filed. The Assessing Officer was, however, of the view that transactions were bogus and merely that it routed through the banking channel, was not sufficient to conclude that they were the genuine transactions. The contention of the assessee that he had not deal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12.5% of the impugned purchases would be reasonable and would meet the ends of justice. Hence, the disallowance is restricted to 12.5% of the impugned purchases for the assessment year in appeal." 5.2 The disallowance at 100% was made in the assessment order for the year under consideration to the tune of Rs. 4,34,00,343/-, which was reduced to 12.5% at Rs. 54,25,040/-. Thereafter, the issue was delat with by the appellate Tribunal. The appellate Tribunal endorsed to the view taken by the appellate Commissioner. It was observed that Assessing Officer failed to consider the evidence furnished by the assessee. 5.3 Considering the facts and relevant aspect, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal partially allowed the appeal of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... entire transaction, but only the income component of the disputed transaction, to prevent the possibility of revenue leakage. Therefore, considering overall facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that disallowances @ 6% of impugned purchases / disputed purchases would be sufficient to meet the possibility of revenue leakage. In the result the ground No. 2 of appeal raised by the assessee is partly allowed and the grounds of appeal raised by revenue are dismissed." 6. The view taken and the conclusion arrived at by the appellant Tribunal are based on material before it and after analysing the facts and figure available before it. When the Tribunal has thought it fit to reduce the disallowance at 6%....