SRI MULCHAND JAIN,PALAMU vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-3, RANCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 54/RAN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 July 2020AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that only the profit element of bogus purchases should be disallowed, not the entire purchase amount. It directed the Assessing Officer to accept the profit at the declared rate of 7%.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns an addition of Rs. 7,19,078/- made for bogus purchases from hawala dealers. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) disallowed the entire purchases, while the corresponding sales were accepted.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correctness of disallowing entire bogus purchases. The tribunal considered whether only the profit element should be taxed in such cases.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI, ‘E’COURT, AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Indrajit Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 13/07/2020Pronounced: 31/07/2020

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench (Oral):

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the CIT(A)-Jharkhand’s order dated 06/12/2018 in appeal no. CIT(A), Ranchi/10196/2017-18 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short the ‘Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

The sole substantive issue that arises for our apt adjudication in the instant case is that of correctness of bogus purchases disallowance / addition amounting to Rs. 7,19,078/- made in both the lower proceedings. It is not in dispute that the impugned disallowance has been made because of profit that the assessee has been found to have made bogus purchases from hawala dealers based in Maharashtra

Sri Mulchand Jain A.Y. 2011-12 after a detailed investigation carried out in the said state. It is on the strength of the said investigation that the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A) have disallowed the assessee’s entire purchases whereas the corresponding sales already stand accepted. We quote hon’ble Bombay high court in the case of PCIT vs. Mohd. Haji Adam in of 2016 dated 11.02.2019 that only the profit element in such alleged bogus purchases has to be disallowed. We therefore direct the Assessing Officer to accept assessee’s profit @ 7% as already declared in the consequential computation as per law.

3.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the Court on 31.07.2020

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →