Loading ITAT cases…
713 orders · Page 12 of 15
The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchases, amounting to Rs. 3,06,013/-. The assessee failed to discharge the onus of proving the genuineness of the transactions and the existence of the vendors.
The Tribunal held that only investments yielding exempt income should be considered for disallowance under Section 14A. Expenses related to shares held as stock-in-trade cannot be disallowed under Section 14A.
The Tribunal held that the addition for bogus purchases should be restricted to 12.5% of the total bogus purchases, and similarly, the addition for other creditors should also be restricted to 12.5%. The Tribunal directed the AO to recompute the additions accordingly.
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of purchases from non-existent parties. Relying on Supreme Court and High Court decisions, the Tribunal affirmed the disallowance of bogus purchases.
The Tribunal held that the re-opening of assessment was justified. It also held that while export sales that could not be substantiated should be added, genuine export sales should be excluded from the calculation of commission income. The rate of commission was upheld.
The Tribunal found the disallowance on account of bogus purchases to be on the higher side. They held that only the taxable income component should be taxed, not the entire transaction, and directed a reasonable percentage of addition to meet the ends of justice.
The Tribunal upheld the addition made by the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2006-07, finding no infirmity in plugging the leakage of revenue. For Assessment Year 2007-08, the addition was restricted to 12.5% of bogus purchases over the declared GP.
The Tribunal upheld the addition made by the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2006-07, finding no infirmity in plugging the leakage of revenue. For Assessment Year 2007-08, the addition was restricted to 12.5% of bogus purchases over the declared GP.
The Tribunal found the disallowance on account of bogus purchases to be on the higher side. They held that only the taxable income component should be taxed, not the entire transaction, and directed a reasonable percentage of addition to meet the ends of justice.
The Tribunal held that only the taxable income component should be taxed when transactions are not verifiable. It restricted the disallowance on bogus purchases to 12.5% of the impugned purchases, considering it would meet the ends of justice.
The Departmental Representative submitted that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 10.00 lacs. Following CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not maintainable due to the low tax effect.
The CIT(A) restricted the addition to Rs. 3,02,937/-, finding merit in the assessee's revised working and submissions regarding lease agreements and property transactions. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order.
The Tribunal held that only the taxable income component should be taxed when transactions are not verifiable. It restricted the disallowance on bogus purchases to 12.5% of the impugned purchases, considering it would meet the ends of justice.