STG INFASTRUCTURE,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 12(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5189/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 March 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

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 are impossible without purchases. However, considering the purchases were from the grey market, a 12.5% disallowance would meet the ends of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns a 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 18,24,489/-. The AO and CIT(A) had confirmed this disallowance. The assessee failed to produce suppliers and transportation details.

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?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Hearing: 01.01.2019Pronounced: 15.03.2019

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 04.05.2017 and pertains to the assessment year (A.Y.)

2010-11.

2.

This is an appeal by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases amounting to Rs.18,24,489/-.

3.

The AO in this case has made 100% addition on account of bogus purchase amounting to Rs.18,24,489/- from 2 parties. Upon assessee’s appeal Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same.

4.

Against the above order assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. None appeared on behalf of assessee despite notice.

5.

Upon careful consideration we find that assessee has provided the documentary evidence for the purchase. Adverse inference have been drawn due to the inability of the assessee to produce the suppliers and absence of transportation details. We find that in this case the sales have not been doubted. It is settled law that when sales are not doubted, 100% 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 Nijunj eximp enterprises (in writ petition no 2860, order dated 18.06.2014). In this case the Honourable High Court has upheld 100% 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 give the assessee saving on account of non-payment of tax and others at the expense of the exchequer. In such situation in our consideration opinion on the facts and circumstances of the case the 12.5% disallowance out of bogus purchases would meet the end of justice. Hence we modify the order of Ld. CIT(A) accordingly.

6.

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed.

Order pronounced on 15th March, 2019.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →