MOHAN P. GOKULKAR,BHIWANDI vs. ITO WD 1(2), KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 380/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 January 2017AY 2006-079 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that while the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of purchases, applying the GP rate to total purchases was not appropriate. A lump sum addition was deemed reasonable to cover revenue leakages and profit suppression.

What were the facts?

The assessee's purchases were deemed bogus by the AO based on information from the Sales Tax Department. The assessee failed to provide supporting documents for these purchases, despite multiple opportunities. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, sustaining an addition of Rs. 26,34,520/- by estimating suppressed gross profit.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition for bogus purchases was correctly made by estimating suppressed gross profit, and if a lump sum addition would be more appropriate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 131,Section 145(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

Hearing: 9.11.2016Pronounced: 11.1.2017

आदेश की प्रनिलऱपऩ अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीऱाथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent 2. आयकर आयुक्त(अपीऱ) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT – concerned 4. ववभागीय प्रतततनधि, आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाडड फाईऱ / Guard File 6. आदेशधन सधर/ BY ORDER, उऩ/सहधयक ऩंजीकधर (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai Date Initials 1. Draft dictated on 3.1.2017 SPS 2. Draft placed before author 4.1.2017 SPS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the Second JM Member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS SPS 6. Kept for pronouncement on SPS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk SPS 8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 9. Date on which file goes to A.R. 10. Date of dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →