Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

DCIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Ajay Arvindbhai Khatri, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-25(1), M/S Ajay Arvindbhai Khatri, Room No.202, 02Nd Floor, 30/31, Borivali Shopping बनाम/ Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Centre, Chandavarkar Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Borivali (West), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400092 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaefa7242G Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By M/S. Dinkel Hariya

…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 and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Babulal B. Kanungo, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of both the assessees are allowed in part for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

…such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 6.9 AO relying on the decisions of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholenath Polyfab Pvt Ltd Vs GT 355 ITR 290 and CIT vs. Simit Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) discussed in the above paras, estimated the addition @12.5% of the total bogus purchase. The facts and the line of business of the appellant in the present case are exactly similar to t…

DCIT CC 3(1) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Oswal & Associates, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3197 &3198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates बनाम/ Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3284 &3285/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers बनाम/ Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines 1924, 19Th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Prateek Jain,Ld.Ar Revenue By : Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld. Dr

…in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009 and in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 23.10.2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012. The view taken by the Tribunal in case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 58 ITD 428 came to be approved. If the entire purchases were wholly bogus and there was finding of fact on record that no purchase were made at all, counsel for the revenue would be justified in arguing that the entire amount of such bogus purchases should be added back to the income of the assessee. Such were the facts in case of ACIT (OSC) Ward 5(3) Nadia…

Oswal & Associates, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3197 &3198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates बनाम/ Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3284 &3285/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers बनाम/ Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines 1924, 19Th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Prateek Jain,Ld.Ar Revenue By : Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld. Dr

…in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009 and in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 23.10.2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012. The view taken by the Tribunal in case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 58 ITD 428 came to be approved. If the entire purchases were wholly bogus and there was finding of fact on record that no purchase were made at all, counsel for the revenue would be justified in arguing that the entire amount of such bogus purchases should be added back to the income of the assessee. Such were the facts in case of ACIT (OSC) Ward 5(3) Nadia…

ITO 18(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Rajkumar B Mutreja, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhincome Tax Officer 18(3)-1 Shri Rajkumar B. Mutreja 6Th Floor, Earnest House, 70, Green Market, Opp. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 Juma Masjid, 021 Mumbai-400 002 Appellant Respondent .. Pan No. Abapm6991R Co No. 92/Mum/2016 (Arising In Ita No. 4511/Mum/2015 A.Y. 2009-10) Shri Rajkumar B. Mutreja Income Tax Officer 18(3)-1 70, Green Market, Opp. Juma 6Th Floor, Earnest House, Vs. Masjid, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 002 Mumbai-400 021 Appellant .. Respondent Revenue By : N Hemalatha, Dr Assessee By : None

…ounting to ₹ 21.97 lakhs. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who relying on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth and also order of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. ACIT 58 ITD 428 restricted the disallowance at 25% by observing as under: - “3.3.2 Reference in this regard is made to the decision of Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs. Smit P Sheth O/TAXAP/552/2012 Tax Appeal No.533 of 2012 dt. I6.01.2013 and ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of M/s.Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. ACIT 58 lTD 428 wherein on similar facts, where quanti…

Vama International, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

…in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009 and in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 23.10.2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012. The view taken by the Tribunal in case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 58 ITD 428 came to be approved.” (Emphasis supplied) 14 ITA.No. 7315, 7316 & 7317/MUM/2016 (A.Ys: 2013-14, 2012-13 & 2011-12) M/s. Vama International 19. Similarly while dealing with an identical issue, in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (Purchase) ltd. ITA.No.No. 63 of 2012, in the order dated 23/10/2012, the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has held as…

Vama International, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

…in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009 and in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 23.10.2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012. The view taken by the Tribunal in case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 58 ITD 428 came to be approved.” (Emphasis supplied) 14 ITA.No. 7315, 7316 & 7317/MUM/2016 (A.Ys: 2013-14, 2012-13 & 2011-12) M/s. Vama International 19. Similarly while dealing with an identical issue, in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (Purchase) ltd. ITA.No.No. 63 of 2012, in the order dated 23/10/2012, the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has held as…

Vama International, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

…in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009 and in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 23.10.2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012. The view taken by the Tribunal in case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 58 ITD 428 came to be approved.” (Emphasis supplied) 14 ITA.No. 7315, 7316 & 7317/MUM/2016 (A.Ys: 2013-14, 2012-13 & 2011-12) M/s. Vama International 19. Similarly while dealing with an identical issue, in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (Purchase) ltd. ITA.No.No. 63 of 2012, in the order dated 23/10/2012, the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has held as…

DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Arvind Pipes & Fittings Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit 5(1)(1) Vs. M/S. Arvind Pipes & Fittings R.No.568, 5Th Floor Industries Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan,M.K.Road Shop No.2, Ground Floor Mumbai – 400 020 12, Nene Building, Sadhashiv X Lane, V.P.Road, Girgaon Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No. Aabca3906B Appellant) Respondent) ..

…s were declared by the Sales Tax Department as 'suspicious1, 'bogus', & 'hawala' dealers. 8. In view of the above discussion, AO added 12.5% on such purchases in assessee’s income after relying on the decision of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. Thus, the addition of Rs.45,50,580/- was made on account of bogus purchase and Rs.2,27,529/- on account of commission on such bogus purchases. 9. By the impugned order, CIT(A) deleted the entire addition without controverting the specific finding so recorded by the AO. Nowhere, CIT(A) has given any of his positive finding so as to come out of the…

Poly Impex, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer 18 (3) (3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Poly Impex, The Income Tax Officer, 102/A, Shri Krupa Chs. Ltd., बनाम/ Ward-18(3)(3), Station Road, Bhayander (East), Earnest House, 5Th Floor, Vs. Thane – 401 105 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaifp 0795 R

…gin embedded in such amount would be subjected 6 M/s. Poly Impex to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Prakash R Budhrani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-2(3), Kalyan

In the result, appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Mr. Prakash R Budhrani Vs. Ito – 2(3) Plot No.103, Kala Palace Kalyan Gol Maidan, Ulhasnagar Mumbai, Maharashtra – 421 001 Pan/Gir No.Abepb7438E Appellant) .. Respondent)

…s made from unverifiable/Hawala parties. The disallowance @ 25% out of unverifiable purchases from unverifiable/Hawala dealer had been upheld in the aforesaid case: (1) Sanjay Oil Cake Industries Vs CIT (2008) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (2) Vijay Proteins Ltd Vs ACIT 58 ITD 428 (Abd) (3) M/s Nand Kishore Meghraj Jewellers, Jaipur CO. No. 105/JP/09 arising out of ITA No. 433/JP/2009 by ITATJaipur (4) M/s. Trident Jewellers ITATJaipur ITA No. 552/JP/2013. In view of the above stated facts, the disallowance @ 25% of Rs.14,99,920/-works out to Rs.3,74,980/- and the same is added to the total income of the assessee. The appel…

Neha Steels, Thane vs. ITO Ward, 1(3), Kalyan

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramt Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, M/S. Neha Steels, Ward-1(3), Kalyan. H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Neha Steels, Income Tax Officer, H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Ward-1(3), Kalyan. Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D

…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 and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan vs. Neha Steels, Thane

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramt Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, M/S. Neha Steels, Ward-1(3), Kalyan. H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Neha Steels, Income Tax Officer, H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Ward-1(3), Kalyan. Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D

…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 and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Kaviraj Construction, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue as well as assessee are hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…n such estimation. White arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, [TAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon’ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties by cross cheques and in fact the A.0. in that case had brought adequate material on record to prove that the cross cheques had n…

DCIT Cir.7(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Pjl Clothing India Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010 - 2011 Dcit Circle 7(3)(1) Pjl Clothing India Ltd., Mumbai बनाम/ Unit No.19, Shree Madhu Estate, Pandurang Budhakar Vs. Marg, Worli, Mumbai 400 018 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacp2782R

…ses have been made almost at the prevailing market rate/price charged by other regular dealers. Therefore no disallowance of any part amount would be justified in the present case, as was done in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. (1996) 55 TTJ (Ahd) 76 : (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd) or in some other cases. He also pointed out that part disallowances made in respect of inflation of purchase price made in the cases of Adinath Industries and Arun Industries have been deleted by the Tribunal and those orders of the Tribunal have been confirmed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. The judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court…

Richi Jewel, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -18(3)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Richi Jewel Ito Ward 18(3)(2), बिधम/ Room No. 24, 2Nd Floor, Ernes House, 6Th Floor, 48, Bihari Baug, 3Rd Floor, Nariman Point,Mumbai- Vs. Bhoiwada, 400021. Mumbai-400002 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aakfr6536Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 6554/Mum/2017 AY: 2010-11 M/s. Richi Jewel Vs. ITO Wd-18(3)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM M/s. Richi Jewel ITO Ward 18(3)(2), बिधम/ Room No. 24, 2nd Floor, Ernes House, 6th Floor, 48, Bihari Baug, 3rd Floor, Nariman Point,Mumbai- Vs. Bhoiwada, 400021. Mumbai-400002 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN No. AAKFR6536Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri S. Sriram, A.R प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by : Ms. N. Hemlata, Sr. D.R सुनवाई की तायीख / : 01.02.2018 Date of H…

Vijay Grihnirman P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 15 & 16, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 Vijay Grihanirman P. Ltd. Acit, 205, Marine Chambers, Central Circle-15 & 16, बनाम/ 43, New Marine Line, Mumbai Vs. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacv2806N Shri Rajat Mittal-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek Jain

…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 and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Prankit Exports, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee as well of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1441/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) बिाम/ Prankit Exports, Ito 25(3)(2) 301 Shviling Apartments, Mumbai Juhu 10T H Road, V. Vile Parle(W), Mumbai-400049 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaafp2359K (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

…bedded in such purchases would be subjected to tax. The Hon'ble Tribunal relied on its earlier in the case of M/s. Saket Steel Traders v. ITO (ITA No. 2801/Ahd/2008 dated 20.05.2008) and also made reference to the decision in the case of Vijaya Protein v. CIT 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.). On appeal by the department the Hon'ble HC of Gujarat, dismissed the appeal. The head note is as under: "Income from undisclosed sources - Assessment - Assessee trading in finished fabrics - Whether purchases themselves bogus -Whether parties from whom such purchases were made bogus-questions of fact - Tribunal finding assessee did purchas…

DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bds Projects P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…ded in such amount would be M/s BDS Projects Pvt. Ltd. subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bds Projects P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…ded in such amount would be M/s BDS Projects Pvt. Ltd. subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…