DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. SINCON INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

ITA 212/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 August 2025AY 2021-224 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the order of the Learned CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided all the necessary evidence for the purchases, including invoices, payment details, and other supporting documents. The AO's addition was based solely on the fact that the suppliers were non-filers and had not responded to section 133(6) notices. The Tribunal noted that the Learned CIT(A) had called for a remand report from the AO, but the AO failed to submit it. The Tribunal also observed that the assessee had produced GST returns filed by the suppliers, which were auto-populated from the website. The Tribunal agreed with the Learned CIT(A)'s reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, which held that mere non-filing of returns by suppliers does not automatically render purchases bogus, especially when the assessee has provided complete documentation and payments were made through banking channels. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s reasoned order.

What were the facts?

The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 28.02.2025, for Assessment Year 2021-22. The appeal challenges the deletion of an addition of ₹4,98,11,922/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 69C read with section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The addition was for unsubstantiated purchases made by the assessee, Sincon Infrastructure Private Ltd., from seven suppliers who had not filed their income tax returns and did not respond to notices under section 133(6) of the Act. The assessee, engaged in construction and maintenance of roads and bridges, had declared a total income of ₹24,08,420/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS due to substantial purchases from non-filing suppliers.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ₹4,98,11,922/- made by the AO under section 69C read with section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on account of unsubstantiated purchases, when the suppliers had not filed their income tax returns and had not responded to notices under section 133(6) of the Act? Assessee's Contentions (as inferred from CIT(A)'s order and Tribunal's findings): The assessee contended that it had furnished all necessary evidence for the purchases, including ledger accounts, invoices, payment details, and other bills and vouchers. The assessee also produced GST returns filed by the suppliers. The assessee relied on the decisions in CIT vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd., Nangalia Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, and CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue's primary ground for appeal was that the purchases were unsubstantiated because the suppliers had not filed their income tax returns and had not responded to notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act, leading the AO to treat the purchases as bogus.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 115BBE,Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘PATNA’ BENCH, PATNA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Alok Kumar, AR
For Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, DR
Hearing: 29.07.2025Pronounced: 26.08.2025

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.02.2025 for the AY 2021-22. 2. The only issue raised by the revenue is against the deletion of addition of %4,98,11,922/- by the Learned CIT (A), NFAC as made by the Learned AO under section 69C read with section 115 BBE of the Income-

tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in respect of unsubstantiated purchases.

2.1.

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 18-02-2022, declaring total inc

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69C

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →