How many judgments cite CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.?

712 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (355 ITR 290), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 147, Section 37(1), Section 153A, Section 132.

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.

355 ITR 290High Court2013#73 most cited

What is CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee makes purchases from bogus parties, but the underlying goods are genuinely acquired and sold, only the profit margin embedded in such purchases, and not the entire value of the bogus purchases, should be added to the assessee's income.

712

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab · 355 ITR 290 · bogus purchases · accommodation entry · unexplained expenditure · profit margin · gross profit rate · section 37(1) · section 68 · section 153A · genuineness of purchases · entire purchases addition

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 147 Section 37(1)Section 153A Section 132 Section 133(6)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 292c section 44ab section 69c section 131 commissioner (appeals)section 132(4)accommodation entry section 145 section 37(1)section 133(6)escapement of income unexplained expenditure

Judgments citing CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.

ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. N.K. Ferromate(India) P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6736/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-5(2)(1), M/S N.K. Ferromate (India) R. No.567, P. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 32/40, Krishna Baug, Vs. M.K. Road, Shop No.6, 2Nd Parshiwada, Mumbai-400020 V.P. Road, Mumbai-400004 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaccn4388N Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S N.K. Ferromate (India) Income Tax Officer-5(2)(1), P. Ltd. R. No.567, बनाम/ 32/40, Krishna Baug, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Shop No.6, 2Nd Parshiwada, M.K. Road, V.P. Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400004 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaccn4388N M/S N.K. Ferromate (India) Ltd.

…med. Hon'ble Apex Court in Kachwala Gems vs JCIT (2007) 158 taxman 71 observed that an element of guesswork is inevitable in cases, where estimation of income is warranted. 2.2. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) held/observed as under:- “5. Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the purchases may have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus. The Tribunal adverted to the facts and data on record and came to the conclusion that the entire quantity of opening stock…

ITO 32(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Darshan Gautam Salot, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for

ITA 3765/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-32(1)(4), Shri Darshan Gautam Salot, R. No.202, C-11, 2Nd Floor, A-3.4, Soni Tower, बनाम/ Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Ram Nagar, Borivali (East), Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400092 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Bmops4552G

Section 133(6)Section 69C

Satish R. Rathod, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 567/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Suresh AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar (SR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 69C

…pparent sellers. Hence, the estimate made by the two appellate authentic does not warrant interference. Even otherwise, whether the estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different sum, can never be an Issue of law. 5.14 In Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), the facts of the case were that the assessee was engaged in the business of trading in finished fabrics. For the A.Y. 2005-06, the Assessing Officer held that the purchases worth 40,69,546/- were unexplained. He, therefore, disallowed such expenditure claimed by the assessee and computed the total Income of If 41,10,187f. The Issue was car…

Rishabh Metal & Chemicals P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1536/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2010-11 Rishabh Metal & Chemicals P Ltd., Dcit 1(3) 4Th Floor, Eros Theatre Bldg., Mumbai Vs. J T Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020

For Appellant: Ms. Neha ParanjpeFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69C

…assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj) and further the order of the Ahmedabad Benches of Tribunal, dated 20.05.2011, in the case of Sanket Steel Traders vs. ITO (ITA No. 2801 & 2937/Ahd/2005 restricted the addition to 12.5% of the purchases from Dev Enterprises. 4. Before us, the learned AR vehemently contended and relied on her submissions made before the CIT(A). But we note…

ITO 26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Keyur Shailesh Sanghvi, Mumbai

ITA 2592/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2592/Mum/2017, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri V. JustinFor Respondent: Shri Keyur S. Sanghvi

Section 148Section 69C

…case of the AO is that the appellant only took bills from the above parties to explain the purchases made albeit from open market. Identical issue came up before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 355 ITR 290 (GUJ). The assessee was engaged in the business of trading in finished fabrics. The AO disallowed purchases as bogus/unexplained. The CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. The issue was carried in appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal which concurred with the finding of the revenue authorities below that such purchase was made from bogus parties. A…

Hemant R. Sanghavi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 16(2), Mumbai

In the result the assessee appeal is dismissed

ITA 178/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Shri Hemant R. Sanghavi Vs. Asst. Cit 16(2) R.No.210, 2Nd Floor D-502, Kukreja Palace Vallabh Baug Lane Matru Mandir, Extension-Ghatkopar (E) Tardeo Road Mumbai – 400 075 Mumbai – 400 007 Pan/Gir No.Aagps4816C Appellant) .. Respondent) Asst. Cit 19(1) Vs. Shri Hemant R. Sanghavi 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir 411, Arihant Building, 4Th Floor, Ahmedabad Street Tardeo Road, Mumbai – 400 007 Carnac Bunder, Mumbai – 400 009 Pan/Gir No. Aagps4816C Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148

…e that assessee has made the purchase from some other party. Therefore what can be added is the profit embedded in bogus purchases which are to be added. The CIT(A) has considered the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in Case Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj) wherein the Gujarath High Court has held Purchases from the bogus party and if party was not produced before the AO for confirmation the only profit element can be added, in that case the Tribunal has held that the purchase were made from the bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus to the entire quantity of open…

Filtertechniks P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1561/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 69Section 69C

…never supplied any materials to the assessee and issued only accommodation bills the purchases made by the assessee from M/s. Om Traders and M/s.S.M. Trading Company are unproved. 10. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd [355 ITR 290] held that when the assessee made purchases and sold the finished goods as a natural corollary not the entire amount covered under such purchases would be subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [38 taxman.com 385]. Further, we a…

Mrunal Shamsunder Naik, Mumbai vs. ACIT 15(2), Mumbai

ITA 911/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 911/Mum/2017, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Phadkar/For Respondent: Ms Arju Garodia

Section 133(6)

…unaccounted goods produced and sold by them. This could be one of the factors due to which the seller would be willing to charge lower rates for unaccounted goods as compared to accounted for goods. Similar views were expressed in BhoLanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj). Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opiiion that not the entire amount, but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders vs. ITO (IT appeal Nos. 15 I.T.A. No. 911/Mum/2017 Mrunal Shamsunder Naik 2801 E 293…

Muffazal Hakim Penwala, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 3740/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3740/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Muffazal Hakim Penawala Cit(A)-28, India House, Ground Floor, Earnest House, Ncpa Marg, बनाम/ Shop No. 1-2, 246, A. R. Street, Nairman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Mumbai-400 003 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpp 1934 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Ruchi M. Rathod ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. V. Rajguru

For Appellant: Ms. Ruchi M. RathodFor Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…/MUM/2009 dated 23/02/2010 after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, restricted the addition to a certain per-cent- age of disputed purchases. Further, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bholanath Ply Fab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) [(355 ITR 290/40 Taxmann.com 494 (2014) /220 Taxmann 82) (Mag.)(Guj.)(HC)] has confirmed the decision of the ITAT that the addition should be restricted to profit element/benefit accrued to the assessee because of bogus purchases. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Simit P. Sheth, has observed that in the case of the bogus purchases, fair r…

ITO WD 5(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Shikha Diamonds P.Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly this ground raised by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3302/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3302/Mum/2017, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Appellant: Shri V. JustinFor Respondent: None

Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…’ble Jurisidictional High Court in the case of Naresh K. Pahuja (2015) 54 taxmann.com 258. Therefore cosindering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and while relying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and to account for the profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize profit earned by assessee against purchase of material in…

ITO 20(3)(5), Mumbai vs. Vision Enterprises, Mumbai

Accordingly this ground raised by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2422/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2422/Mum/2017, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri V. JustinFor Respondent: None

Section 147

…CIT(A) restricted the additions @ 5.18% by estimating profit on the total bogus purchases. Therefore cosindering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and while relying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and to account for the profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize profit earned by assessee against purchase of material in…

Sunil B. Vorani (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO 20(3)(4), Mumbai

Accordingly these ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1337/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 1337/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchi RathodFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…e find that Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the findings of AO in estimating the profit @ 25% of the total sales. In our considered view, considering the facts of the present case and while relying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth 8 Sunil B. Vorani (HUF) (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and also considering the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of SMC in assessee’s own case and to account for the profit e…

Prithviraj G. Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3057/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147

…ted as bogus purchases. He also Placed reliance on the following decisions in its support: - 6 ITA.No.911/MUM/2016 ITA.No.1805 & 3057/MUM/2017 Prithviraj G.Jain (i) CIT v. Simit P. Seth, (2013) 356 ITR 451 (GUJ) (ii) CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) (iii) CIT v. Satyanarayan P. Rathi (2013) 355 ITR 150 (GUJ) (iv) ITO v. Sunsteel (2005) 92 TTJ (Ahd) 1126 (v) Shri Ghevarchand B. Jain (Appeal No. CIT(A) 27/16(3)/180/13-14) (order dated 01.04.2014 of Hon'ble CIT(A) – 27, Mumbai for A.Y.2010-11) 7. Before us Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer disallowed th…

Prithviraj G. Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1805/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147

Prithviraj G. Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 911/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147

ACIT 1(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sovika Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5096/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit-1(3)(1), M/S Sovika Chemicals Pvt. Room No.540, 5Th Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, B/2, Parekh Mahal, 80, Vs. M.K. Road, Veer Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacs5390N

Section 69C

…med. Hon'ble Apex Court in Kachwala Gems vs JCIT (2007) 158 taxman 71 observed that an element of guesswork is inevitable in cases, where estimation of income is warranted. 2.2 The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) held/observed as under:- “5. Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the purchases may have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus. The Tribunal adverted to the facts and data on record and came to the conclusion that the entire quantity of opening stock…

DCIT Cir. 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. P-Cube Construction Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5019/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, M/S P-Cube Construction Circle-13(1)(2), Private Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.218, 02Nd Floor, 1/A/101, Umiya Nagar, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Visheshwar Nagar Road, Mumbai-400020 Off Aarey Road, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400054 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aadcp9320N

Section 69C

DCIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. J Kumar Infrapojects Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4231/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…he assessee. So much is clear by the decision of this court. In particular, the court has also taken a similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 /TR 498 (Guj) and in the case of CIT Vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). The view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. Asstt. 15 M/s. J. Kumar Infraprojects Limited CIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd) came to be approved. 8. If the entire purchases were wholly bogus and there was a finding of fact on record that no purchases were made at all, counsel for the Revenue would be justified in argu…

DCIT Cir 7(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Paxchem Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 921/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Bled.C.I.T Circle 7(3)(1) V. M/S. Paxchem Ltd., Room No. 669A, Plot No. A-34, T.T.C. Industrial Area, Aayakar Bhavan, Pawane, Mumbai – 400 710 M.K. Road, Church Gate, Mumbai-400 020 Pan No: Aaccp 0919 J

For Appellant: Shri N.JayendranFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 147

…ervations made by the Sales Tax authorities without making independent inquiries could not be sustained. This is precisely what has happened in the case under consideration. 8. Further, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd [355 ITR 290] held that when the assessee made purchases and sold the finished goods as a natural corollary not the entire amount covered under such purchases would be subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [38 taxman.com 385]. Simply becaus…

ITO 7(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Prompt Toys P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3022/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…ision of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Vijay Protiens Ltd (supra) wherein it was held that only profit element embedded in bogus purchases needs to be taxed. We further notice that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt Ltd 355 ITR 290 (Guj) observed that whether purchases themselves were to be taxed or whether parties from whom such purchases made were bogus is essentially a question of fact and the Tribunal having examined the evidence on record concluded that the assessee did purchase cloth and sold goods, the entire purchase would not be 7 subjected to tax. In yet another c…