2021 (12) TMI 97 - AT - Income Tax

Estimation of income - bogus purchases - HELD THAT - As decided in M/S. CHORON DIAMOND (I) PVT. LTD. AND VICE-VERSA 2017 (11) TMI 184 - ITAT MUMBAI AO and the CIT(A) after examining the documents furnished by the assessee have concluded that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from suspicious dealer. It is observed that although the dealer from whom the assessee has made alleged bogus purchases has confirmed the sale transactions but no document in the form of stock inward register, delivery receipt, etc. has been furnished by the assessee to prove trail of goods. The assessee has failed to discharge its onus in proving authenticity of purchase transactions. Therefore, the primary contention of the assessee to delete entire addition is rejected. Tribunal in the case of assessee engaged in trading of diamonds restricted the addition to 2% of unproved purchases. Considering the fact that the nature of assessee s business and the nature and manner of addition is similar to the one referred in the aforesaid case, the addition on account of unproved transactions in the instant appeal is restricted to 2%.

Summary

Issues:
- Reopening of assessment for AY 2010-11 based on alleged bogus purchases
- Addition of alleged bogus purchases by AO
- CIT(A) upholding reopening and restricting addition to 12.5%
- Assessee challenging involvement in accommodation entries
- Dispute over profit margin estimation
- Similar issues in AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13

Analysis:
1. The appeals in question pertain to the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2012-13, involving alleged bogus purchases by the assessee leading to a dispute with the Revenue. The AO reopened the assessment for AY 2010-11 based on the assessee's dealings with a group concern, resulting in an addition of Rs. 3,52,667. The CIT(A) upheld the reopening and limited the addition to 12.5% of the bogus purchases.

2. The assessee contended that despite providing substantial evidence to prove the genuineness of the purchases, authorities erred in implicating them in accommodation entries. The assessee sought complete deletion of the addition or, alternatively, a reduction to 2% based on profit margin estimations. The Revenue, however, supported the AO's findings, emphasizing the lack of proof of authenticity in the transactions.

3. The Tribunal referred to precedents like Choron Diamond India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT, where profit margins for diamond trading were considered, leading to a restriction of additions to 2% of unproved purchases. In the present case, the Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal, reducing the addition based on the profit margin estimation.

4. For AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13, similar issues of alleged bogus purchases from group concerns were raised. The Tribunal found the facts and arguments analogous to AY 2010-11, leading to the partial allowance of the assessee's appeals and the dismissal of the Revenue's appeals for all three assessment years.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeals for all three assessment years, while dismissing the Revenue's appeals. The judgment emphasized the importance of proving the authenticity of transactions and considered profit margin estimations in determining the additions for alleged bogus purchases.