BHUPENDRA M. MUNDADA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), MUMBAI

These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-48 dated 31/10/2017 for the A.Y.2009-10 and 2010-11 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. In both the appeals, assessee is aggrieved for addition of 100% on account of bogus purchases under the head ‘unexplained investment’ in purchases.

Our attention was also invited to the documents placed on record, which indicate that purchases so made was reflected in the Purchase Register/ Leger, Stock Register and also Bank Book. It was also contended that all the payments are made through cheques and are reflected in the assessee’s books of accounts. Our attention was also invited to the corresponding sales bills with regard to these purchases. He further submitted that corresponding sales have been accepted by the AO and books of accounts were not rejected. Various judicial pronouncements of the Tribunal were placed on record wherein addition on account of the bogus purchases has been confirmed to the extent of 12.5%. As the facts and circumstances in the instant case are same, respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Benches as placed on record, we direct the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. We direct accordingly.