9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 651 - AT - Income TaxUnverifiable purchases - CIT(A) deleted part addition - Held that - The matter has been set aside by the ITAT twice and the assessee was not able to correlate the purchases made from M/s Anmol Ratan and M/s Shruti Gems to the tune of ₹ 57,50,000/- with export bills. The ld CIT(A) partly accepted the correlation between the purchases made from both the parties and export bills but she confirmed that the purchases made from both the parties are bogus and the assessee might have purchased these items from the grey market but the purchase bills were taken from both these parties. The assessee himself has also accepted that it was not able to correlate the purchases made from these two parties partially. Similar line of cases, this Bench has decided in the case of Shri Anuj Kumar Varshney Vs. I.T.O. and other gems and jewellery cases 2015 (4) TMI 533 - ITAT JAIPUR where on unverifiable/bogus purchases 15% disallowances has been decided and we have also applied the same percentage as net profit on unverifiable purchases of ₹ 57,50,000/-, which comes to ₹ 8,62,500/-. Thus we confirm addition of ₹ 8,62,500/-. The burden lies on the assessee, which has not been discharged rightly that purchases were made are genuine and same has been exported. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. Disallowance of deduction U/s 80HHC - Held that - AR has not been able established connection between the purchases made from both the parties and export made by it. When the items purchased and items exported could not be correlated, in absence of correlation no deduction U/s 80HHC can be allowed. Decided against assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Addition of Rs. 57,50,000/- on account of unverifiable purchases. 2. Deduction under Section 80HHC on the addition of Rs. 23,76,774/-. Detailed Analysis: 1. Addition of Rs. 57,50,000/- on account of unverifiable purchases: The case involves cross appeals by both the revenue and the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-I, Jaipur, for the A.Y. 2002-03. The primary issue is the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of unverifiable purchases amounting to Rs. 57,50,000/-, which was partly deleted by the CIT(A). The revenue appealed against the deletion, while the assessee appealed against the partial confirmation of Rs. 23,76,774/-. The assessee, engaged in the export of precious and semi-precious stones, had filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 3,92,950/-. The AO observed that purchases from M/s Anmol Ratan (Rs. 47,50,000/-) and M/s Shruti Gems (Rs. 10,00,000/-) were bogus. Consequently, the AO made an addition of Rs. 57,50,000/- under Section 69C, treating it as income from other sources and unaccounted expenditure. The CIT(A) directed a recalculation of profit by applying a G.P. rate of 15% on the turnover and allowed deduction under Section 80HHC, deleting the addition to the extent of Rs. 54,94,050/-. The ITAT, in its earlier order, remanded the matter to the AO, directing to verify if the goods worth Rs. 57,50,000/- were exported. Despite multiple notices, the assessee failed to comply, leading to an assessment under Section 144. The AO reiterated that the purchases were bogus, as the assessee could not establish the genuineness of the transactions. The AO applied Section 69C and alternatively Section 68, treating the purchases as unexplained expenditure and adding Rs. 57,50,000/- to the income. The CIT(A) partially accepted the correlation between purchases and exports, allowing Rs. 33,73,226/- but disallowed Rs. 23,76,774/- due to lack of correlation with export invoices. The CIT(A) concluded that the purchases were manipulated, and the funds were diverted for non-business purposes, thus adding Rs. 23,76,774/- to the income. The ITAT, in its final judgment, confirmed the addition of Rs. 8,62,500/- (15% of Rs. 57,50,000/-) as net profit on unverifiable purchases, following the precedent set in similar cases. 2. Deduction under Section 80HHC on the addition of Rs. 23,76,774/-: The second issue concerns the deduction under Section 80HHC on the addition of Rs. 23,76,774/-. The CIT(A) disallowed the deduction, stating that the purchases could not be correlated with the exports, and the funds were diverted for non-business purposes. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the assessee failed to establish a connection between the purchases and exports. Without correlation, the deduction under Section 80HHC could not be allowed. Conclusion: The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's appeal by confirming the addition of Rs. 8,62,500/- as net profit on unverifiable purchases and disallowing the deduction under Section 80HHC on Rs. 23,76,774/-. The judgment emphasizes the necessity of correlating purchases with exports to claim deductions and the importance of providing adequate evidence to substantiate the genuineness of transactions.
|
