← All Phrases

“bogus purchases”

DisallowancesSection 69CSection 69C9,532 judgments

The decision most relied on for bogus purchases is CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (355 ITR 290), cited in 712 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on bogus purchases

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.
355 ITR 290 · 2013 · High Court
712
citing judgments

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.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT
316 ITR 274 · 2009 · High Court
460
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
58 ITD 428 · 1996 · ITAT
430
citing judgments

Where purchases are found to be non-genuine or fictitious, a reasonable disallowance of 25% of such purchases or the peak credit, whichever is higher, can be made. This is applied to address unexplained expenditure under Section 69C when actual goods are likely procured from the grey market.

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.
418 ITR 315 · 2019 · Supreme Court
408
citing judgments

Income tax additions cannot be sustained merely on the basis of uncorroborated statements or allegations. The Revenue must bring on record sufficient material and allow the assessee to produce evidence to prove such additions.

Nikunj Eximp Enterprises v. CIT
216 Taxmann 171 · 2013 · High Court
325
citing judgments

Purchases may be treated as genuine even if the purchase parties are untraceable or not available for verification, as long as there is no specific evidence from the parties themselves denying the transactions or proving them to be bogus.

CIT v. Shyam R. Pawar
54 Taxmann.com 108 · 2015 · High Court
279
citing judgments

Transactions involving the purchase and sale of shares cannot be considered bogus where the assessee provides documentary evidence, unless the revenue brings substantial evidence on record to reject such proof. This principle is consistently applied in cases concerning claims of bogus long-term capital gains arising from penny stock transactions.

CIT v. Simit P. Seth
38 Taxmann.com 385 · 2013 · High Court
278
citing judgments

When an assessee obtains accommodation bills for purchases but the corresponding sales are genuine, the addition to income is limited to the gross profit margin embedded in such purchases. This principle acknowledges that the underlying sales were real, but profit was suppressed through bogus invoices.

CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd.
355 ITR 498 · 2013 · High Court
252
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or hawala purchases where the existence of transactions is not entirely denied, only the profit element embedded in such purchases, and not the entire purchase price, can be added to the assessee's income. The focus is on determining a reasonable profit percentage for such additions.

Judgments citing bogus purchases

Mr Hajaram Purohit, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (CC)-5(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 1945/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 1944 & 1945, 1934 & 1935/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2011-12 & 2012-13) Mr. Hajaram Purohit Vs. Dcit (Cc)-5(3) 33, Ganesh Bhuvan, Room No. 11, Ground 3Rd Khetwadi Lane, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400004 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Agupp6813E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dipen Tanna Respondent By : Nihar Ranjan Samal Date Of Hearing 07.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.02.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): These 4 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-53, Mumbai. Since Common Issue On Identical Facts Are Involved In These Appeals Except Variation In The Amount, Therefore, These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 1944/Mum/2022 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeal Vide Ita No. 1945/Mum/2022. Similarly, The Finding In Respect Of Ita No. 1934/Mum/2022 Will Be Applied Vide

For Appellant: Dipen TannaFor Respondent: Nihar Ranjan Samal
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151

furnished any evidence to show the genuineness of the purchases. 5. Thereafter, ITAT vide order dated 24.04.2019 restored the matter regarding addition of bogus purchases to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh on merit after giving the assesse proper opportunity of being heard ... completed on 30.03.2015 by determining total income at Rs.11,98,38,110/- after making addition of Rs.11,86,69,553/- on account of bogus purchases made from six parties as discussed supra in this order. Thereafter vide order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated

Mr. Hajaram Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT (CC) -5(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 1944/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 1944 & 1945, 1934 & 1935/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2011-12 & 2012-13) Mr. Hajaram Purohit Vs. Dcit (Cc)-5(3) 33, Ganesh Bhuvan, Room No. 11, Ground 3Rd Khetwadi Lane, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400004 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Agupp6813E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dipen Tanna Respondent By : Nihar Ranjan Samal Date Of Hearing 07.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.02.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): These 4 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-53, Mumbai. Since Common Issue On Identical Facts Are Involved In These Appeals Except Variation In The Amount, Therefore, These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 1944/Mum/2022 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeal Vide Ita No. 1945/Mum/2022. Similarly, The Finding In Respect Of Ita No. 1934/Mum/2022 Will Be Applied Vide

For Appellant: Dipen TannaFor Respondent: Nihar Ranjan Samal
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151

furnished any evidence to show the genuineness of the purchases. 5. Thereafter, ITAT vide order dated 24.04.2019 restored the matter regarding addition of bogus purchases to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh on merit after giving the assesse proper opportunity of being heard ... completed on 30.03.2015 by determining total income at Rs.11,98,38,110/- after making addition of Rs.11,86,69,553/- on account of bogus purchases made from six parties as discussed supra in this order. Thereafter vide order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated

Mr. Hajaram Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT (CC) -5(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 1935/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 1944 & 1945, 1934 & 1935/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2011-12 & 2012-13) Mr. Hajaram Purohit Vs. Dcit (Cc)-5(3) 33, Ganesh Bhuvan, Room No. 11, Ground 3Rd Khetwadi Lane, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400004 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Agupp6813E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dipen Tanna Respondent By : Nihar Ranjan Samal Date Of Hearing 07.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.02.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): These 4 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-53, Mumbai. Since Common Issue On Identical Facts Are Involved In These Appeals Except Variation In The Amount, Therefore, These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 1944/Mum/2022 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeal Vide Ita No. 1945/Mum/2022. Similarly, The Finding In Respect Of Ita No. 1934/Mum/2022 Will Be Applied Vide

For Appellant: Dipen TannaFor Respondent: Nihar Ranjan Samal
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151

furnished any evidence to show the genuineness of the purchases. 5. Thereafter, ITAT vide order dated 24.04.2019 restored the matter regarding addition of bogus purchases to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh on merit after giving the assesse proper opportunity of being heard ... completed on 30.03.2015 by determining total income at Rs.11,98,38,110/- after making addition of Rs.11,86,69,553/- on account of bogus purchases made from six parties as discussed supra in this order. Thereafter vide order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated

Shri. Hajaram P Purohit, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax (CC) -5(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 1934/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 1944 & 1945, 1934 & 1935/Mum/2022 (A.Ys.2011-12 & 2012-13) Mr. Hajaram Purohit Vs. Dcit (Cc)-5(3) 33, Ganesh Bhuvan, Room No. 11, Ground 3Rd Khetwadi Lane, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400004 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Agupp6813E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dipen Tanna Respondent By : Nihar Ranjan Samal Date Of Hearing 07.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.02.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): These 4 Appeals Filed By The Assesse Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-53, Mumbai. Since Common Issue On Identical Facts Are Involved In These Appeals Except Variation In The Amount, Therefore, These Appeals Are Adjudicated Together By Taking The Ita No. 1944/Mum/2022 As A Lead Case & Its Finding Will Be Applied Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeal Vide Ita No. 1945/Mum/2022. Similarly, The Finding In Respect Of Ita No. 1934/Mum/2022 Will Be Applied Vide

For Appellant: Dipen TannaFor Respondent: Nihar Ranjan Samal
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151

furnished any evidence to show the genuineness of the purchases. 5. Thereafter, ITAT vide order dated 24.04.2019 restored the matter regarding addition of bogus purchases to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh on merit after giving the assesse proper opportunity of being heard ... completed on 30.03.2015 by determining total income at Rs.11,98,38,110/- after making addition of Rs.11,86,69,553/- on account of bogus purchases made from six parties as discussed supra in this order. Thereafter vide order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated