9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 903X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein as observed that if the factum of sales has been accepted by the Department then even if it is established that there were bogus purchases, it is not necessary that entire amount should be added to the income of the Assessee as there cannot be a sale without purchase. The facts of the present case are identical wherein the sales have been accepted. Therefore, in light of the aforesaid decisions first question of law does not survive for consideration. Addition u/s. 41(1) - cessation of liability - tribunal deleted the penalty - as per revenue the said liabilities were not payable as they stood barred by limitation - HELD THAT:- As decided in JAIN EXPORTS PVT. LTD. [ 2013 (5) TMI 690 - DELHI HIGH COURT] afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in upholding the view of the learned CIT(A) to delete the disallowance of Rs.1,52,29,070/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of cessation of liability ignoring the Assessing Officer s finding that the said liabilities were not payable as they stood barred by limitation? 4. As regards first question, the Tribunal has upheld the finding and conclusion of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to disallow 12.5% bogus purchases and to add 12.5% of the amount of purchases as income of the Appellant. The argument advanced is that the bogus purchase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax v. G.K. Patel 212 Taxman 384 and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd. 89 DTR 265. 6. The Delhi High Court in the case of Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd. has relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. State of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 328 and CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 518 (SC). In Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd., the Supreme Court has referred to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kohinoor Mills v. C.I.T. (1963) 49 ITR 578 (Bom). The Delhi High Court, after following these decisions concluded that merely because the liability is barred by limitation, it d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
