Assessing Officer held that the creditor expenses were not genuine and that those creditors were merely book entries and had already been paid off in cash. Accordingly he added the amount to the income of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) restricted the additions to the profit element of 25 per cent. Both the assessee and the Department filed appeals before the Tribunal both of which were rejected. Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal had correctly limited the additions made by the Assessing Officer to 25 per cent of unverifiable alleged bogus creditors.
CIT v. Nandkishor Huaschand Jalan (2019) 412 ITR 357 (Guj.)(HC)
S. 69A : Unexplained money–Bogus purchases- Sundry creditors—Disallowance by Assessing Officer as bogus purchases—Tribunal confirming the 25% of profit embedded in credits–Held to be justified. [S. 37(1), 145]