SHRI ASHOK DHINGARMAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), KALYAN
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 made from the grey market, a 12.5% disallowance was deemed appropriate.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer made a 100% addition on account of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 5,09,555/-, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee appealed this decision.
What were the issues?
Whether 100% disallowance of purchases is justified when sales are not doubted. The extent of disallowance for purchases made from the grey market.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Not explicitly mentioned
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM
O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.:
This is an appeal by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune-2 (‘ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 01.02.2018 has sustained 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchase of Rs.5,09,555/-.
The Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) in this case has made 100% addition on account of bogus purchase amounting to Rs.5,09,555/-, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A).
Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT.
I have heard both the counsel and perused the records. I 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 the Hon'ble 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 100% allowance for the purchases said to be bogus when sales are not doubted. However the facts of the present case indicate that the 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 my considered opinion, on the facts and circumstances of the case, 12.5% disallowance out of the bogus purchases meets the end of justice. Accordingly, I modify the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct that the disallowance be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchase of Rs.5,09,555/-.
The ld. Counsel of the assessee fairly agreed to this proposition.
In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16.10.2018
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026