9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oss profit rates, a limited amount of estimation and gross work is always inbuilt. The assessee had pointed out that without the additions, the gross profit for the year under consideration was approximately 7%. Tribunal therefore, did not commit any error in accepting the gross profit rate of 8% on the purchases which was otherwise found not genuine. No question of law arises. The disclosure made by the assessee in his statement pertained to the bogus purchases and was therefore rightly assessed by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal. No question of law arises. Tax Appeals are dismissed - TAX APPEAL NO. 411 of 2017 With TAX APPEAL NO. 413 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2017 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI AND HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee on 20.06.2008. For the assessment year 200708, the return of the assessee was taken in scrutiny. Assessing Officer found that the assessee had made bogus purchases worth of Rs.5.66 crores (rounded off) from five different agencies. During the survey operation, in his statement, the proprietor of the assessee firm had also disclosed a sum of Rs.61.05 lakhs on account of bogus purchases. However, subsequently such statement was retracted through an affidavit dated 07.09.2011 and in the return filed, the assessee has not disclosed such sum. The Assessing Officer in the order of assessment, added both the amounts i.e. the bogus purchases of Rs.5.66 crores and declared amount of Rs.61.05 lakhs in the statement of the assessee. The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e disclosure of Rs.61.05 lakhs made by the assessee in his statement recorded during the survey, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the same was part of the addition already sustained by him and no separate addition would be justified. 5. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Revenue as well as assessee both filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the common impugned judgment, partially allowed the appeal of the assessee and rejected that of the Revenue. This judgment has therefore given rise to present two tax appeals at the hands of the department. In the impugned judgment, the Tribunal while sustaining the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) recording bogus purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
