ROSONA TOOLS,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(3)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 723/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 February 2020AY 2009-105 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the addition of 12.5% of the alleged non-genuine purchases, agreeing with the CIT(A) that the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the genuineness of the purchases.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment based on information from the Sales Tax Department regarding alleged non-genuine purchases. The AO's notices to suppliers were returned unserved, and the AO estimated profit at 12.5% on these purchases.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of profit on alleged non-genuine purchases is justified when suppliers could not be verified and the assessee failed to provide supporting evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA

For Respondent: Shri R.K. Gubgotra (JCIT-DR)
Hearing: 04/02/2020Pronounced: 13/02/2020

per material on record which do not require any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the same.

5.

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13th February, 2020.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →