For the assessment years 2009-2010 and 2011-2012, the assessments were reopened u\/s\u00a0section 147 of the Act, 1961, on the grounds that the assessee received\u00a0accommodation\u00a0entries from a number of dealers who were alleged to be providing\u00a0accommodation\u00a0entries\u00a0without the transportation of any goods. The assessee was asked\u00a0to provide proof of the validity of the purchases made from numerous vendors during the reassessment process. The Assessing Officer classified the purchases as non-genuine because he was dissatisfied by the assessee’s arguments, in light of the fact that the assessee failed to present the parties and because the parties remained improbable. The Commissioner (appeals) sustained the AO\u2019 action of estimation the gross profit at 12.5 per cent.<\/p>\n
On further appeal, the Tribunal held that the sales out of the purchases had been treated as genuine which was an undisputed fact. When the sales had been accepted as genuine the entire purchases could not be treated as non-genuine. There should be an estimation of the profit element from these purchases which should be estimated reasonably as the assessee could not conclusively prove that the purchases made were from the parties in the absence of any confirmations from them. The AO was directed to estimate the profit element at 5 per cent for the non-genuine purchases. The disallowance of purchases was also to be restricted to 5 percent and the income was to be computed accordingly. (AY.2009-10, 2011-12)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Accommodation entries-information by investigation wing-assessee failed to prove whole purchases as genuine-5 % profit element to be added in purchases. [S. 147,148] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-aVH","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42017","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42017"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42017\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42018,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42017\/revisions\/42018"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}