Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : ITO Vs Arvind Ratanchand Jain (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2020-21
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
ITO Vs Arvind Ratanchand Jain (ITAT Mumbai) The Mumbai ITAT upheld the restriction of addition to 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases, rejecting the AO’s higher addition of 25%, and reaffirmed the settled principle that only profit element embedded in such purchases can be taxed. The AO had treated purchases of ₹54.27 crore as non-genuine due to: Suppliers having cancelled GST registrations, Circular trading patterns, Lack of proper transport and documentation, Non-commensurate banking transactions. Accordingly, AO made 25% addition (₹13.56 crore). However, the CIT(A): Noted that sales w...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Patna ITAT: Interest on Delayed Payment of Sales Tax, Service Tax & Employer’s PF Contribution Allowable; TDS Interest Not Deductible Section 54F Deduction Allowed on Genuine House Purchase from In-Laws: Mumbai ITAT Pune ITAT Quashes Reassessment as Section 148A(b) & 148A(d) Reasons Differed Section 54 Relief Can’t Be Denied Merely Due to Section 50C Addition: Pune ITAT Delhi ITAT Deletes Penny Stock Addition; Suspicion Can’t Replace Evidence View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031