← All Phrases

“bogus purchases”

DisallowancesSection 69CSection 69C9,532 judgments

The decision most relied on for bogus purchases is CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), cited in 1,465 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on bogus purchases

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported 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.

CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
372 ITR 619 · 2015 · High Court
391
citing judgments

Transactions defying human probability cannot be applied to isolated purchases if sales are accepted as genuine, and purchases cannot be disallowed without considering the entire transaction and documentary evidence. Failure to produce parties in an assessment proceeding may not be fatal to the assessee.

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.

Judgments citing bogus purchases

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 950/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 818/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 817/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 816/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 815/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 814/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 813/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad said suppliers had defaulted in making payment of sales-tax, then the assessee should not be considered to have recorded bogus purchases. He further stated that when the statement was recorded at the time of search, the suppliers were not traceable. However, later on, the assessee managed ... course of assessment proceedings. In view of the fact that the assessee had himself offered Rs.99,41,075/- as additional income on account of bogus purchases in the course of search relating to the year under consideration and included the same in his return of income, the AO disregarded

Shri Krutarth Shah (Prop. K.V.Industries), Mumbai vs. ITO 28(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while for the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6536/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

following grounds of appeal: “Ground No. 1 The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in making the addition of Rs.11,70,005/- on count of Bogus Purchases by estimating addition @ 18% inspite of fact that all payments to suppliers are by account payee cheques & quantity details were filed with him. Ground ... without considering the latest Apex Court decision in the case of N.K. Proteins Ltd. wherein it was held that addition on the basis of bogus purchase could not be restricted to certain percentage when entire transaction was found as bogus. 2. The appellant prays that the order

Manohar S. Ali, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment years 2011-12

ITA 5981/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Manohar S. Ali, Gala No. 6, The Ito – 2(5), Doshi Industrial Estate, Navghar Thane, Road Bhayander (E) Maharashtra. Maharashtra- 401105 Vs. Pan: Adppa4968F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.N. Rao. (Ar) Revenue By : Akhtar H. Ansari (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing: 05/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/11/2019

For Appellant: Shri B.N. Rao. (AR)For Respondent: Akhtar H. Ansari (Sr.DR)
Section 143Section 147Section 148

sales tax department Maharashtra through DGIT (Investigation) to the effect that the assessee during the year relevant to the assessment year under consideration obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs. 11,35,260/- from three parties mentioned in Assessment Years: 2011-12 the assessment order, whose name were ... case and law- The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases to the tune of Rs. 2,83,815/-.” 4. The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that since, the action

Manohar Shambu Suvarna, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward- 31(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-11

ITA 5930/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-2011 & Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Manohar Shambu Suvarna, The Income Tax Officer Ward 3,Suresh Bhawan,Chincholi – 31(2)(3), Bunder Road, Malad (W) Mumbai Mumbai - 400064 Vs. Pan: Abeps0736L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Neha Pranjpe (Adv.) Revenue By : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing: 05/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/11/2019

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Pranjpe (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari (Sr.DR)
Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 148

sales tax department Maharashtra through DGIT (Investigation) to the effect that the assessee during the year relevant to the assessment year under consideration obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs. 6,31,655/- from M/s. Disha Enterprises, which was in the list of ‘hawala’ parties prepared by the Maharashtra sales ... department. The said parties used to provide bogus purchase bills on commission basis without making actual delivery of goods. On the basis of the said information, the AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act after issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Accordingly, the AO issued notices

ACIT-31(2), Mumbai vs. Kakkar and Brothers, 2010-11

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5793/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanacit 31(2) M/S Kakkar & Brothers Room No. 107,1St Floor, C-13, 413-414, Deven Industrial Estate, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Ib Patel Road, Goregaon East, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 063, Mumbai- 400 051

For Appellant: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, D.RFor Respondent: None
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147

facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in addition of Rs.3,10,853/- made on account of bogus purchases from hawala parties as detected by Sales Tax Department to the extent of Rs. 38,854/- being12.5% of the bogus purchases ... facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the addition on account of bogus purchases to the extent of 12.5% without appreciating the ratio of decision in the case of N.K. Proteins Ltd [250 taxman 22(SC)]. 3. Tax Effect is below

Rajesh Kumar Arora, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-63(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8174/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Goyal, CA & Mrs. SurbhiFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 148

from the Competent Authority and adopted the prescribed procedure as per law and made the addition in dispute by holding that assessee has taken bogus purchases bill/ accommodation entries. Since no books of accounts were produced during the assessment proceedings and no reply was filed by the assessee in response

ITO 27 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Associated Chemicals, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6833/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad (Jm) & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer – 27(1)(1) M/S. Associated Chemicals Mumbai A/103, Gurudv Apartments, Ramchandra Chemburkar Vs. Marg, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 Pan- Aae Fa7 487 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Michael Jerald (Dr) Revenue By : Shri Viraj Mehta Date Of Hearing: 05/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/11/2019

For Appellant: Shri S. Michael Jerald (DR)For Respondent: Shri Viraj Mehta
Section 48(5)

erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,40,240/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases, without appreciating the fact that the assessee had failed to produce bills, vouchers and other documentary evidences in support of his claim and without considering the latest Apex Court decision ... erred in estimating the profit from Hawala purchases by disallowing only Rs. 34,320/- Assessment Year: 2009-10 being 12.5% of the bogus purchases as even the basic onus of producing delivery challan, transport bills etc., were not fulfilled by the assessee. 3. The appellant prays that the order

M/S.L A S A, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5992/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5992/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Respondent: Shri S. Michel Jerald, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

entry as discussed in para. 6 of the order. It is known fact that sales tax department found out several entities, which were giving bogus purchase bills. Assessee also had claimed certain expenses through such entities. By not filing appeal, it is accepted, I am therefore, satisfied that the assesses ... deleted. 9. The appellant submits that no penalty can also be imposed on addition of Rs 28,670 on account of alleged bogus purchases for the following reasons:- a. The huge loss for the year of Rs 1,73,26,789 itself displaces the allegation of bogus purchases of such

Smt. Shanta Anil Garad, Ambernath vs. ITO -WD 2(4), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed accordingly

ITA 4961/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4961/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Smt. Shanta Anil Garad बिधम/ Ito Ward 2(4) 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, H. No. 606, Laxmi Niwas, Vs. Ward No.8, Morivali Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada Village, Ambernath-421505. Kalyan-421301. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aglpg8260F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Sumin Makhija Revenue By: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 02.05.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Sumin MakhijaFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR)
Section 143(3)

dealer. 2. Without Prejudice to the above appellant submits that the CIT (appeals) has seriously erred in confirming the addition @ 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases without appreciating that: i) As decided by various Judicial forums under situations alike of the assesee what is to be added is the profit ... element embaded in the transaction which in assesses case is 4.9% only. ii) That assessee has paid VAT on alleged bogus purchase to the Maharastra VAT Authorities @12.5%, deduction for which has to be allowed while making addition. iii) Assessee has already declared Gross Profit on all the purchase recorded

M/S.M.P.Brothers, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-17(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby ordered to be allowed accordingly

ITA 4761/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.4759, 4760 & 4761/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. M. P. Brothers बिधम/ Acit Circle 17(2) 64, Eby Castle Mohamed Ali Mumbai. Vs. Road, Mumbai-400003. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccb6672L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue By: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 10.05.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 57, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. Ita. No.4760/Mum/2018 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 10.05.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -57, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2009-10. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 148

basis of information received from the DGIT(Inv.), Mumbai in which it was conveyed that the assessee has taken the accommodation entries of bogus purchase in sum of Rs.52,047/- from the following two parties. A.Y.2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Name of the Party Amount Ankit Enterprises 10,795 Darshana ... Corporation 41,252 5. After the reply of the assessee, the AO restricted the addition to the extent of 100% of the bogus purchase in sum of Rs.52,047/-. The total income of the assessee was assessed to the tune of Rs.31,38,920/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed

M/S. Bhawarlal Alok Kumar, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 34, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 732/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

raised by the assessee which is as under: “1. Against sustaining the addition to the extent of Rs.48,34,000/- on account of alleged bogus purchases.” a) For that on facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A) erred in sustaining ... extent of Rs.48,34,000/- out of addition of Rs.3,22,28,000/- made by Ld. Assessing Officer on account of alleged bogus purchases. b) For that on facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in observing that purchases have been made by appellant

Pushpa Nareshkumar Dhanania, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 17(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4512/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am Pushpa Nareshkumar Dhanania Ito, Ward-17(2)(5), 24, Saraswati Sadan, 1St Floor, Mumbai 113, Keshvaji Naik Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 009

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

appeal by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has erred in sustaining 12.5% disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 02.05.2018 pertaining to assessment year 2011-12. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged ... pipe fittings. 3. The Assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the Sales Tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However the suppliers were not produced before the assessing officer. Sales

Sagar International Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 7(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2456/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं././././I.T.A No.2456/Del/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 Sagar International Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Income Tax Officer, Fb/81, East Mohan Co-Op, . Ward-7(2), New Delhi. Indl, Estate, Extn., Badarpur, Delhi – 110044. [Pan: Aaacs 3043 E] अपीलाथ / Appellant !"यथ /Respondent

Section 147Section 148

ld.CIT(A). 9. Brief facts as emerged from the assessment record and appellate order are that the assessee has obtained accommodation entries / bogus purchases bills from M/s.Shree Bankey bihari Trading Co.,; M/s.Vishu Trading Co.,; M/s.Shree Shyam Trading Co., and M/s.Om Agencies amounting Rs.53,58,954/- which were admitted ... entry provider in their statement before the ACIT, Central Circle-10, New Delhi that they have provided bogus purchase accommodation entries from their aforesaid concerns. Therefore, the AO concluded that the purchase shown by the assessee company from the aforesaid concerns were bogus. Accordingly, the AO made the addition

S.P.Mani and Mohan Dairy, Erode vs. ACIT Circle 1, Erode

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1321/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mrs.G.Vardini Karthik, CAFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)

Section 41(1)(a) of the 1961 Act mainly on the allegation that the assessee has inflated purchases in its books of accounts wherein bogus purchases were introduced by assessee in its books of accounts or else payments were made to creditors for milk supplies out of undisclosed income ... categorized these purchases into three categories and made additions towards waiver of sundry creditors on the allegation that either these are inflated bogus purchases introduced in books of accounts or these purchases are paid in cash out of the undisclosed income of the assessee which are not recorded in books