AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2019-20 arises against the C IT(A)/NFAC, De lhi’ s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082890494(1) dated 27.11.2025, in proceed ings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1 961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges during the cour se of hearing that the assessee raises his sole substantive ground challenging both the learned lower authoritie s’ action treating it’s purchases amo unting to Rs.11,60,008/- sourced from Sh. Sanjay Jain, as bogus under section 69C of the Act, in assessment order dated 27.02.2025 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
That being the case, bo th the parties vehemently reiterate the ir respective stands against and in support of the impugned bogus purchases disallowance. I wish to make it clear that there is no disp ute in principle that the assessee is engaged in construction business all along wherein possibility of some cash tur nover could not be altogether ruled out. And that his correspond ing sales have nowhere been questioned in both the lower proceedings. Various recent judicial precedents (2025) 173 taxmann.com 592 (Guj.) RavjibhaiBecharbhaiDhamelia vs. AC IT; (2024) 160 taxmann.com 110 (Bom) PCIT Vs. Hite sh Mody (HUF), (2024) 160 taxmann.com 93 (Del) PCIT Vs. Forum Sales (P) Ltd.; (2025) 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom) PCIT Vs. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd; (2025) 178 taxmann.co m 424 (Del. – Trib.) DCIT Vs. Kohinoor Foods Ltd.; and (2025) 177 taxmann.co m 836 (Delhi-trib.) DCIT Vs. Tirupati Matsup (P.) Ltd. have recently decided the instant issue of bogus purchases with divergent views as well.
Faced with these peculiar facts, it is thus deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lump sum disallowance @ 5% of the assessee’s alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs.11,60 ,008/- would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall fo llow as per law.
No other ground or argument has been pressed.
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms.