ITO, 29(3)(4), MUMBAI vs. SUNPACK CORPORATION, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1083/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 February 2020AY 2010-112 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) held that the assessee should be given credit for the Gross Profit (GP) rate already declared. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s findings to be in line with the material on record and judicial pronouncements.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment based on information from the Sales Tax Department alleging that the assessee took purchase bills without taking delivery of goods. The AO added 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases to the assessee's income.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of alleged bogus purchases by the AO was justified, and whether the CIT(A) correctly allowed credit for the declared GP rate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Divyesh Fotaria (AR)
For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh (DR), Shri Divyesh Fotaria (AR)
Hearing: 11/02/2020Pronounced: 11/02/2020

discussed in the order of the ld. CIT(A), therefore, no interference is required. Hence, we uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A).

3.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11th February, 2020.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →