2021 (10) TMI 828 - AT - Income Tax

Estimation of income - bogus Purchases - CIT-A sustaining addition @12% of the alleged non-genuine purchases - HELD THAT - As there should be an estimation of profit element from these purchases and should be estimated reasonably as the assessee could not conclusively prove that the purchases made are from the parties as claimed, especially in the absence of any confirmations from them. Average Gross Profit ratio to sales of the assessee for the last three preceding Assessment Years i.e. A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2008-09 it is arrived at 9.19% and the Gross Profit margin of the assessee for the current assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2009-10 is 9.17%. In view the nature of business of the assessee i.e. trader in manufacturer and dealer in watches, and the Gross Profit ratio to sales for the last three preceding assessment years and also current assessment year it would be justified if the profit element embedded in those purchases are estimated at 9.5% Thus we restrict the disallowance of purchases to 9.5% and compute the income accordingly - Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition of alleged non-genuine purchases by Assessing Officer.
2. Reopening of assessment under section 147 based on information from Investigation Wing.
3. Treatment of purchases as non-genuine by Assessing Officer.
4. Appeal against the decision of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
5. Estimation of profit element from purchases by Appellate Tribunal.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) sustaining the addition of alleged non-genuine purchases made by the Assessing Officer at the rate of 12%. The assessee, engaged in the business of manufacturing and dealing in watches, declared income for the relevant assessment year. The assessment was reopened under section 147 based on information received regarding accommodation entries provided by various dealers, including the assessee.

2. The Assessing Officer treated the purchases as non-genuine, suspecting that the assessee obtained accommodation entries without actual transportation of goods and might have made purchases in the gray market. Despite the assessee providing ledger accounts, bills, bank statements, and quantitative details of traded goods to prove the genuineness of purchases, the Assessing Officer remained unconvinced. Notices issued to the parties were returned unserved, leading to the conclusion that the purchases were sham and non-genuine, resulting in an addition of Rs. 22,59,005 as 12% of the total non-genuine purchases.

3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, prompting the assessee to appeal. During the appeal, the assessee's counsel argued that the addition was on the higher side and requested a reduction. The counsel highlighted the Gross Profit ratio of the assessee for the preceding assessment years and proposed an estimation of the addition at 9% instead of 12%, citing a relevant case law.

4. After hearing both sides and reviewing the lower authorities' orders, the Appellate Tribunal noted that while sales were accepted as genuine, not the entire purchases could be deemed non-genuine. Referring to relevant case laws, the Tribunal emphasized the need to estimate the profit element from the purchases reasonably, especially when parties providing the goods were not produced before the authorities.

5. Considering the nature of the assessee's business and the Gross Profit ratios from previous years, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to estimate the profit element from non-genuine purchases at 9.5% for the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, instructing the computation of income based on the revised estimation of the profit element from the purchases.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of reasonably estimating the profit element from non-genuine purchases in the absence of conclusive proof from the assessee.