BALJEET KAUR,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT TEAM, DELHI

It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned authorities have treated the assessee’s purchases of Rs.23,81,000/- of apparels and garments in her regular business activity from M/s. Royal Enterprises; as bogus going by the search and the statement of one Sh. Aditya Jain, in the course of assessment framed on 08.02.2024 and upheld in the lower appellate proceedings. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s vehement contentions reiterating their respective stands. The Revenue’s case is that the assessee had made bogus purchases which has been rightly disallowed going by the statement of Sh. Aditya Jain forming part of the evidence unearthed during search. It is in this factual backdrop that the department herein could not dispute that the assessee’s corresponding sales already stand treated as genuine, and therefore, I quote PCIT Vs. Mohammad Hazi Adam & Co. (2019) 103 taxmann.com 459 (Bom) to hold that the only gross profit element involved in these purchases deserve to be disallowed. It is indeed coupled with the fact that the assessee has filed all her other evidences explaining her purchases/sales involved herein. I 3 | P a g e therefore hold in these peculiar facts and circumstances that a lump sum disallowance of estimated GP component herein of Rs.2,38,100/- i.e. at the rate of 10%, is considered just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. 6. No other ground or argument has been pressed. 7. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 6th January, 2025 (SATBEER SINGH GODARA)