Case Law Details
Prateek Gupta Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by CIT(A) on account of bogus purchases at rate of 12.5% of purchase u/s 69C is justified in law?
ITAT states that, in assessee’s own case for the A.Y.2010-11 dated 04/04/2018 wherein under similar facts and circumstances alleged bogus purchases from one of the parties i.e. Sai International Impex was found, and the Tribunal after considering all the facts and circumstances restricted the same to the extent of 2% after observing that from the record, Tribunal found that 25% of purchases alleged to be bogus was added by AO in assessee’s income. CIT(A) has reduced same to 12.5%. Before the AO, assessee has filed year wise details of purchases, details of payment made through account payee cheque. In addition to the purchase details, assessee has ITA No. 4774/Mum/2014 & 5116/Mum/2014 Shri Suman Gupta also filed details of corresponding sales affected by the assessee in respect of the very same goods. The sales so affected are not in dispute and the same were accepted in total by the AO. ITAT found that in this case AO has only alleged purchase made from Sai International. In respect of the goods purchaser than the GP shown in the immediately preceding Assessment year. In view of the above discussion and keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, ITAT modify the order of lower authorities and direct the AO to upheld addition of 2% of bogus purchases.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
These are the cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue against the order of CIT(A)-52, Mumbai dated 21/03/2018 for A.Y.2008-09 & 2010-11 respectively, in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
