2023 (5) TMI 779 - AT - Income Tax

Estimation of profit - Bogus purchases - HELD THAT - We agree with the view of the lower authorities that 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. Keeping in view the nature of business of the assessee i.e. trader in Iron and Steel Metals, it would be justified if the profit element embedded in those purchases are estimated at 5%. We direct the Assessing Officer to estimate the profit element from the non-genuine purchases at 5% for both the Assessment Years i.e., A.Y. 2009-10 and A.Y. 2011-12 and restrict the disallowance of purchases to 5% and compute the income accordingly. Appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) sustaining the action of the Assessing Officer regarding non-genuine purchases.
- Estimation of profit element from non-genuine purchases.
- Applicability of VAT rate on the addition.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were filed by the assessee against the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) sustaining the action of the Assessing Officer regarding non-genuine purchases. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessments based on information received about accommodation entries provided by various dealers, including the assessee. The Assessing Officer treated certain purchases as non-genuine, leading to the dispute. The assessee claimed the purchases were genuine, but the Assessing Officer disagreed, leading to an addition in the income. The Ld.CIT(A) upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, resulting in the appeals by the assessee.

2. The main issue revolved around the estimation of the profit element from the non-genuine purchases. The Assessing Officer had treated a specific amount as non-genuine, and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the action by estimating the Gross Profit at 12.5%. However, the Tribunal disagreed with this approach. The Tribunal referred to judgments by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and the Bombay High Court, emphasizing that the entire amount covered under such purchases should not be subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Considering the nature of the business and the lack of conclusive proof from the assessee, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to estimate the profit element at 5% for both assessment years and restrict the disallowance accordingly.

3. Another issue raised during the proceedings was the applicability of the VAT rate on the addition. The assessee argued that the applicable VAT rate during the relevant period was only 4% and requested the addition to be sustained at that rate. However, the Tribunal did not specifically address this argument in its judgment, focusing primarily on the estimation of the profit element from the non-genuine purchases. The Tribunal ultimately partly allowed the appeals filed by the assessee by directing the Assessing Officer to estimate the profit element at 5% and compute the income accordingly.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment provided clarity on the treatment of non-genuine purchases, emphasizing the need to estimate the profit element rather than considering the entire amount as non-genuine. The decision highlighted the importance of evidence and reasonable estimation in such cases, ultimately resulting in a partial allowance of the assessee's appeals.