LALIT KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (ITO), WARD 35(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1952/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 October 2025AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the purchases before the AO, the CIT(Appeals), and even before the Tribunal. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was sustained.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) which sustained the addition made in respect of bogus purchases for AY 2021-22. The assessee did not respond to notices issued by the AO for establishing the genuineness of purchases.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made on account of bogus purchases is justified when the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of such purchases.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI M BALAGANESH

For Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 27.08.2025

सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 27.08.2025 27.10.2025 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi for the AY 2021-22 in sustaining the addition made in respect of bogus purchases.

2.

In spite of issue of notice, none appeared on behalf of assessee nor any adjournment was moved. Thus, we hear the Ld. DR and dispose of this appeal on merits.

3.

Heard Ld. DR, perused the orders of the authorities below.

4.

On perusal of the assessment order, it is noticed that in the course of assessment proceedings the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the AO for establishing the genuineness of the purchases made by the assessee from various parties. In spite of several opportunities given by the AO the assessee did not respond to the notices and therefore the AO estimated the profit element at 25% of the total purchases as income of the assessee.

5.

On appeal the Ld. CIT(Appeals) sustained the addition as the assessee could not establish the genuineness of the purchases. Ld. CIT(Appeals) agreed with the view of the AO. Even before us the assessee could not establish the genuineness of the purchases and therefore we see no infirmity in the order passed by the authorities below. Thus, we sustain the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and reject the grounds raised by the assessee.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.10.2025

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →