TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 30
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[in short the "CIT(A)", New Delhi's order dated 06.03.2025 passed in appeal number NFAC/2021-22/10363993, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in its Cross Objection No.23/Del/2026:- Ground 1: That, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in law in assuming jurisdiction and completing the assessment pursuant to a notice issued under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was not issued in accordance with the binding Instructions issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide instruction circular F NO. 225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23.06.2017 as the AO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unt of non deduction of tax on rent payment of Rs. 85,46,688/- after considering the submissions made by assessee, however, no remand report was called for from the AO to verify the same. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in deleting the Addition of Rs. 48,46,405/-out of total addition 55,74,319/- made by the Assessing officer in respect of excess purchase and added only gross profit i.e. 2.37% of total excess/bogus purchases. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in deleting the Addition of Rs. 1,48,005/-out of total addition 1,48,606/- as unexplained expenses u/s 69с as the assessee did not submit any explanation for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- under Section 40a(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961) on account of non-deduction of TDS on rent paid. The assessee has submitted that it had claimed total rent of Rs. 1,57,08,178/- for one whole sale shop and 54 retails shops. The copy of shop licences showing the address of the shop taken on rent were submitted before the AO. The assessee has submitted that TDS was applicable only on the rent of Rs. 71,61,480/- and the 'TDS was not deductible on the balance rent paid. It has been submitted that the rent of Rs. 54,75,000/- was paid to individual parties wherein the rent paid per person was less then Rs. 2,40,000/- per annum and TDS deduction is not applicable. The rent of Rs. 30,71,688/- was paid to Haryana Urben Development Authority and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Forum Sales (P) Ltd.; (2025) 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom) PCIT Vs. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd; (2025) 178 taxmann.com 424 (Del. - Trib.) DCIT Vs. Kohinoor Foods Ltd.; and (2025) 177 taxmann.com 836 (Delhi-trib.) DCIT Vs. Tirupati Matsup (P.) Ltd. have decided the instant issue of bogus purchases with divergent views i.e. accepting or partly allowing or rejecting the same in entirety; as the case may be. We thus express our full concurrence with the learned CIT(A)/NFAC's in foregoing detailed discussion adding not only granting part relief but also estimating GP @2.37% guided by market comparables. These Revenue's second and third substantive grounds are hereby rejected. 9. Learned CIT-DR next vehemently submits that the Revenue's fourth sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... thoughtful consideration to Revenue's and assessee's submissions reiterating their respective stands against and in support of the learned CIT(A)'s foregoing detailed discussion. We find no reason to sustain the impugned addition as such an estimation at a flat rate of 20% than having examined each and every corresponding sundry credit entry(ies) does not deserve to be concurred with. This is indeed coupled with the fact that the assessee had duly pleaded and proved with its supporting evidence and the corresponding purchases also stand accepted as in the preceding paragraphs. We thus uphold the learned CIT(A)'s/NFAC's impugned appellate discussion deleting this sundry credits addition in very terms. 11. The Revenue's last substantive g....