ITO 33(3)(5), MUMBAI vs. VIPUL K SHETH, 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 12.5% of the bogus purchase addition. It reasoned that while 100% disallowance is not justified when sales are not doubted, purchases from the grey market warrant some disallowance to account for tax evasion.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in chemical trading, faced a 100% addition for bogus purchases based on information from the Sales Tax Department. The CIT(A) reduced this addition to 12.5% after noting that the assessee's sales were not doubted.
What were the issues?
Whether 100% disallowance of bogus purchases is justified when sales are not doubted, and what is the appropriate disallowance percentage in such cases, especially when grey market purchases are involved.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA
This is an appeal by the Revenue wherein the Revenue is aggrieved that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 45, Mumbai (in short ‘CIT(A)’) has reduced the addition for bogus purchase of Rs.8,93,651/- done @ 100% by Assessing Officer by sustaining only 12.5% for the Assessment Year 2010-11 vide order dated 10.01.2019.
The assessee in this case is engaged in trading of chemicals. The assessment was reopened upon information from Sales Tax Department that assessee has made purchases of Rs.8,93,651/- from bogus dealers. The Assessing Officer made 100% addition of the bogus purchase. Upon assessee’s appeal, learned CIT(A) has noted that the sales has not been doubted.
Vipul K. Sheth Accordingly, placing reliance upon several case laws and upon the facts of the case, he sustained 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases.
Against the above order, Revenue is in appeal before the ITAT. I have heard both the counsel 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 Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Nickunj Eximp Enterprises (in Writ Petition No. 2860, order dated 18.06.2014). In this case, the Hon'ble High Court has upheld hundred percent allowance for the purchases said to be bogus when sales are not doubted. However, the facts of the present case indicate that assessee has made purchase from 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 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 ITAT Rules on 17th November, 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 →- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026