2017 (11) TMI 1598 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowing the bogus purchases u/s. 69C - profit estimation - Held that - From the record we found that the average Gross Profit for the last 5 years is 3.65% and average Gross Profit of subsequent 3 years from A.Y, 2012-13 to 2014-15 (all assessed u/s. 143(3) of the Act) is 5.87%, whereas the current Gross rate Profit offered by the assessee in the year under consideration is 8.15%. We found that GP rate in the A.Y.2012-13 was 5.39% and the assessment was framed u/s.143(3). In the A.Y.2013-14 it is 6.10% and in 2014-15 6.11% when the assessment was framed u/s.143(3). Thus, the average GP rate works out to 5.87% against which during the year under consideration assessee has declared GP rate of 8.15% which is much better than the GP rate declared in other years and for which assessment was framed under scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3). Keeping in view totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we restrict the addition to the extent of 2% of the GP in respect of the alleged bogus purchases. We direct accordingly.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of alleged bogus purchases under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act.
2. Reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act.
3. Disallowance of 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases based on estimation.

Analysis:
1. Disallowance of alleged bogus purchases:
The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in directing the disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchases as suppressed profits instead of invoking Section 69C of the Income Tax Act. The appellant sought to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restore the AO's decision. On the other hand, the Assessee challenged the reopening of assessment under Section 147 and the disallowance of 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases. The CIT(A) upheld the reopening of assessment and disallowed 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal considered the evidence submitted by the Assessee during assessment proceedings and concluded that only the profit element attributable to the bogus purchases needed to be added. The addition was restricted to 2% of the GP in respect of the alleged bogus purchases based on the Assessee's profit rates over the years.

2. Reopening of assessment:
The Assessee argued against the reopening of assessment under Section 147, claiming that there was no justification for it. However, the Tribunal found that the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening provided sufficient grounds to believe that income had escaped assessment. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the Assessee's appeal against the reopening of assessment.

3. Disallowance of 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases based on estimation:
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) relied on the Gujarat High Court's decision to restrict the addition to 12.5% of the disputed bogus purchases. The Assessee provided all necessary evidence during assessment proceedings, and the AO did not find any deficiencies. The Tribunal considered the Assessee's profit rates over the years and restricted the addition to 2% of the GP in relation to the alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessee's current GP rate was significantly higher than in previous years, justifying the limited addition.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partially allowed the Assessee's appeal, directing the addition to be restricted to 2% of the GP related to the alleged bogus purchases. The reopening of assessment was upheld based on sufficient grounds provided in the reasons recorded by the AO.