Loading ITAT cases…
409 orders · Page 9 of 9
The Tribunal held that when sales are not doubted, the corresponding purchases cannot be entirely bogus. A disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchases was deemed to meet the ends of justice, following precedent.
The Tribunal held that when sales are not doubted, the entire purchase cannot be disallowed as bogus. A disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchases was deemed to meet the ends of justice, as agreed by the assessee's counsel.
The CIT(A) found that the fall in Gross Profit (GP) rate was negligible and that most of the AO's objections were either technical faults or unsubstantiated. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that the AO's ad-hoc addition was not sustainable.
The Tribunal held that a 100% disallowance for bogus purchases is not sustainable when sales are not doubted. However, considering purchases were made from the grey market, a disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchase was deemed to meet the ends of justice.
The Tribunal, following a Special Bench decision, held that the amended provisions limiting carry-forward to four years were not applicable to losses incurred prior to the amendment. The assessee was entitled to set off the brought-forward speculation loss.
The CIT(A) deleted the addition, holding that negative net worth due to accumulated losses should be treated as nil for calculating capital gains under Section 50B. The Tribunal, however, decided to remit the issue back to the AO.
The Tribunal held that when sales are not doubted, purchases cannot be entirely bogus. A disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchases was deemed to meet the ends of justice, following precedent.
The Tribunal noted that the quantum addition, which formed the basis for the penalty, had already been deleted in a prior appeal. Therefore, the penalty order could not survive.
The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the tax effect being below the prescribed monetary limit as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The circular was also clarified to apply retrospectively to pending appeals.