TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1040
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n'ble CIT(Appeal) NFAC, Delhi bearing no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082169052(1) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is unreasonable, arbitrary and against the provision of Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore liable to be quashed. 2. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble C.I.T.(Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance made u/s. 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 3,51,10,067/- on account of alleged bogus purchases made, without considering the written submissions and various documentary evidence submitted by the Appellant. 3. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble C.I.T(Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fraud to GST Authority. On the basis of such reply, the AO issued fresh show cause notice to the assessee as to why purchases shown from Delightful Collections (Chandraparakash Shukla) should not be treated as bogus purchases. In response to show cause notice, the assessee filed his reply dated 12.12.2022, the contents of reply of assessee are recorded in para 4.1.2 of assessment order. In the reply, the assessee stated that he has purchased fabrics worth Rs. 3.34 crore from Delightful Collections. The purchases of Rs. 3.51 crore inclusive of 5.00% GST. To substantiate purchases, the assessee furnished purchase invoices, transport receipts, e-way bill, and bank statement highlighting payment to supplier. It was further stated that GST ITC ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e not recorded by AO in his order. The AO held that on perusal of submission, he found that such payment was made to Smt. Hetal Patel, who is only metric pass. The fees were paid for administrative work in office. The AO further noted that from return of income of Smt. Hetal Patel, it was seen that her return was below taxable limit and only receipt was shown by her from the assessee. The AO held that such expenses were claimed only to suppress the profit. On appeal before ld. CIT(A) both the disallowances were confirmed. Further, aggrieved the assessee has filed present appeal before Tribunal. 4. We have heard rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. Ground no. 2 relates to d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... including weight, number of packets, description of goods, value of goods, amount of GST, despatch documents and vehicle number and GST/PAN No. of transporter. Contract number of transporter on the e-way bill which sufficiently proved the actual delivery of goods. None of the documents furnished by assessee was found to be false or fabricated. The ld. AR of the assessee prayed the delete to entire disallowances purchases from Delight Collections. 5. Against ground no. 3, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee paid consultancy to Hetal Patel which is genuine. The TDS was deducted the AO has not brought on record any evidence to show. The assessee has made payment of reduce the taxable income. The addition is made on frivolous g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rties from whom the assessee has shown purchased of more than Rs. 2.00 lakhs. The assessee furnished details of all such sellers including of Delightful Collections. The assessee also furnished details of ledger confirmation, purchase invoices, purchase bills, e-way bill, lorry receipt with GST return of seller. In order to verify the transaction of purchases, the AO issued notice under section 133(6) to Delightful Collections. In response to such show cause notice one Chandraparakash Shukla filed response and stated that his PAN number was misused by his friend. The said Chandraparakash Shukla has not provided the name and address of his friend who has misused his PAN. The AO has not carried out any further investigation about alleged misu....