2017 (8) TMI 194 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowances of bogus purchases - Tribunal adopting the gross profit rate of 8% as against 25% adopted by the CIT(Appeals) - Held that - When additions are made on the basis of gross profit rates, a limited amount of estimation and gross work is always inbuilt. The assessee had pointed out that without the additions, the gross profit for the year under consideration was approximately 7%. The Tribunal therefore, did not commit any error in accepting the gross profit rate of 8% on the purchases which was otherwise found not genuine. No question of law arises. The disclosure of ₹ 61.05 lakhs made by the assessee in his statement pertained to the bogus purchases and was therefore rightly assessed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding disallowance of bogus purchases.
2. Challenge to the addition of undisclosed income admitted during a survey operation.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Challenge to the judgment on bogus purchases
The respondent, engaged in the business of refining and selling edible oils, faced scrutiny for allegedly making bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer found bogus purchases worth &8377; 5.66 crores and an additional sum of &8377; 61.05 lakhs disclosed during a survey operation. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held the purchases as bogus but restricted the addition to 25% of the bogus purchase amount, citing a previous court decision. The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, reducing the addition to 8% of the bogus purchases, contrary to the Commissioner's decision. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, noting that adding the entire bogus purchase amount would distort the gross profit margin, justifying the 8% rate over the 25% adopted earlier.

Issue 2: Challenge to the addition of undisclosed income
Regarding the undisclosed income admitted during the survey, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the amount was already part of the sustained addition and did not warrant a separate addition. Both the Revenue and the assessee appealed to the Tribunal, which upheld the Commissioner's decision. The High Court agreed with the Tribunal, stating that no separate addition was justified for the disclosed &8377; 61.05 lakhs, as it was related to the bogus purchases already addressed.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the Tax Appeals, finding no error in the Tribunal's decision on the gross profit rate for bogus purchases and upholding the treatment of the disclosed amount as part of the sustained addition.