LAXI STEEL (INDIA),MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(2)(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that when sales are not doubted, a 100% disallowance for bogus purchases is not justified, as sales imply actual purchases. However, considering purchases were made from the grey market, a 12.5% disallowance was deemed just.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in trading metals, faced disallowance for bogus purchases based on information from the sales tax department. The Assessing Officer added 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the validity of disallowing purchases when sales were not doubted, and the extent of disallowance for purchases made from the grey market.
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)
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
These are appeals by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has erred in sustaining 12.5% disallowance on account of bogus purchases pertaining to assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12.
Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged in business of trading of ferrous and non-ferrous metals. Information was received from the sales tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessment was accordingly reopened. The Assessing Officer in this case has made 12.5% addition on account of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 16,84,687/- for A.Y. 2010-11 & Rs. 8,78,092/- for A.Y. 2011-12.
Upon assessee’s appeal Id CIT(A) confirmed the same.
Against above order assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the records.
2 Laxmi Steel (India)
Upon 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. 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 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 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases meets the end of justice. However, in this regard it is noted that when only the profits earned by the assessee on these bogus purchases 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.
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 purchase as reduced by the gross profit already declared by the assessee on these transactions. Learned Counsel of the assessee fairly accepted this proposition.
In the result, these assessee's appeals stand partly allowed. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 06.01.2020.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- 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
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026