GALA COATINGS,THANE vs. ITO 4(5), THANE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that 100% disallowance for bogus purchases is not sustainable when sales are not doubted. However, considering purchases were from the grey market, a partial disallowance of 12.5% of bogus purchases, reduced by the gross profit already declared, was deemed appropriate.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in metal coating business, faced a 100% disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchases based on information from the sales tax department. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance.
What were the issues?
Whether 100% disallowance of purchases is justified when sales are not doubted, and if not, what is the appropriate disallowance for grey market purchases.
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
Before: Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pawan Singh (JM)
Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This is an appeal by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has erred in sustaining 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases by order dated 10.8.2018 for A.Y. 2009-10.
Brief facts of the case are that assessee is engaged in the metal coating business. Information was received from the sales tax Department that assessee has that in bogus purchases. The assessment was accordingly reopened. The assessing officer in this case has made 100% addition on account of bogus purchase amounting to Rs. 15,03,840/-.
Upon assessees appeal Id CIT(A) confirmed the same.
Against above order assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records.
2 M/s. Gala Coatings
Up on careful consideration we find that assessee has provided the documentary evidence for the purchase. Adverse inference has been drawn due to the inability of the assessee to produce the suppliers. We 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 in that case all the supplies were to government agency. In the present case the facts of the 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 meets the end of justice. However in this regard learned counsel of the assessee has prayed that when only the profits earned by the assessee on these bogus purchase transaction is to be taxed the gross profit already shown by the assessee and offered to tax should be reduced from the standard 12.5% being directed to be disallowed on account of bogus purchases.
Upon careful consideration, we find considerable cogency in the submission of the learned Counsel of the assessee as otherwise it will be double jeopardy to the assessee. Accordingly, we modify the order of learned CIT(A) and direct that the disallowance in this case be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchases as reduced by the gross profit rate already declared by the assessee on these transactions. If the profit already declared by the assessee is more than 12.5% no disallowance is required. Learned Counsel of the assessee fairly accepted this proposition.
3 M/s. Gala Coatings
In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed.
Order has been pronounced in the Court on 3.2.2020.
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 →- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- 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