ITO, 19(1)(1), MUNBAI vs. SHRI ANKIT J. JHAVERI, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to sustain only a 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases. This was based on the principle that when sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchases is not justified, and the 12.5% disallowance was considered to meet the ends of justice.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) made a 15% addition for bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 6,77,245/- based on information from the sales tax department. The assessee is a proprietor dealing in gift items and wrought iron products.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether 100% disallowance of purchases was justified when sales were not doubted, and if a partial disallowance was appropriate for purchases made through the grey market.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai
This is an appeal by the revenue wherein the revenue is aggrieved that Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short learned CIT(A)] has reduced the addition for bogus purchase of Rs. 6,77,245/- done @ 15% by Assessing Officer by sustaining only 12.5% for the AY 2009-10 vide order dated 19.2.2019.
The assessee is a proprietor of M/s. J.B. Manufacturing Company, which is engaged in the business of dealing in gift, novelties and wrought iron products. The assessment was reopened upon information from sales tax department that assessee has made Rs. 45,14,967/- purchases from bogus dealers, the AO made 15% addition of the bogus purchase resulting in disallowance of Rs. 6,77,245/-.
Upon assessee's appeal learned CIT(A) has noted that the sales has not been doubted. Accordingly placing reliance upon several case laws and up on the facts of the case he sustained 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases.
2 Shri Ankit J. Jhaveri
Against above order revenue is in appeal before the ITAT. I have heard both the parties and perused the record. I find that in this case the sales have not been doubted it is settled law that when sales are not doubted, hundred percent disallowance for bogus purchase cannot be done. The rationale being no sales is possible without actual purchases. This proposition is supported from honourable jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (in writ petition no 2860, order dt. 18.6.2014). In this case the honourable High Court has upheld hundred percent allowance for the purchases said to be bogus when sales are not doubted. However facts of the present case indicate that assessee has made purchase from the grey market. Making purchases through the grey market gives the assessee savings on account of non-payment of tax and others at the expense of the exchequer. In such situation in our considered opinion on the facts and circumstances of the case the 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases done by the learned CIT(A) meets the end of justice. Accordingly I uphold the order of learned CIT(A).
In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.
Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules by placing the result on notice board on 23.11.2020.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026