AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066923161(1) dated 23.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee raises his sole substantive ground challenging bo th the le arned lower authorities’ action treating it’s purchases amounting to Rs.2,01,24,027/- sourced fro m M/s RCI Industries and Technology, as bogus under section 68 of the Act, in assessment order dated 28.03.2023 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
That being the case, both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned bogus purchases disallowance. I wish to make it clear that there is no dispute in principle that the assessee is engaged in tr ading business all along wherein po ssibility of some cash tur nover could not be altogether ruled out. And that his corresponding sales have nowhere been questioned in bo th the lower proceedings. Various recent judicial precedents (2025) 173 taxmann.com 592 (Guj.) Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhamelia vs. ACIT ; (2024) 160 taxmann.co m 110 (Bom) PC IT Vs. Hitesh 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. Ko hinoor Foods Ltd.; and (2025) 177 taxmann.com 836 (De lhi-trib.) DCIT Vs. Tirupati Matsup (P.) Ltd. have de cided the instant issue of bogus purchases with diver gent views as well.
Faced with these peculiar facts, it is thus deemed appropriate in the lar ger interest of justice that a lump sum disallowance @ 5% of the assessee’s alleged bo gus purchases amounting to Rs.2,01,24,027/- would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall no t be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.
No other ground or argument has been pressed.
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms.