Builder's Purchases Held Genuine Despite Sales Tax Alert; ITAT Deletes Rs. 1.07 Crore Income Tax Addition:

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has upheld the deletion of an addition of Rs 1.07 crore made on account of alleged bogus purchases.
ITAT Mumbai Holds That AO Cannot Travel Beyond Scope of Remand Order

Builder's Purchases Held Genuine Despite Sales Tax Alert; ITAT Deletes Rs. 1.07 Crore Income Tax Addition
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai held that generalized third-party statements unsupported by direct evidence cannot override contemporaneous documentary records.
The assessee is engaged in property development, painting, renovation and repair contracts and had filed his return declaring an income of Rs 43.19 lakh for assessment year 2010-11. Based on information received from the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department, the assessment was reopened. The AO treated purchases amounting to Rs 1.07 crore as b and added the entire amount to the assessee's income.
In the first round of appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) held that the contracts executed by the assessee required procurement and consumption of materials and, therefore, complete disallowance of purchases was unsustainable. Subsequently, on an application filed by the assessee, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for the limited purpose of furnishing statements relied upon by the Department and granting an opportunity of cross-examination. In the fresh proceedings, the AO once again treated the entire purchases as bogus and restored the addition of Rs 1.07 Crore. The CIT(A), however, deleted the addition after holding that the AO had exceeded the scope of the remand order and that the assessee had furnished sufficient documentary evidence proving receipt and utilization of material.
The Tribunal observed that AO was not competent to revisit those issues in the second round of proceedings, as the earlier findings had attained finality. The Bench further noted that the statements relied upon by the Department were general in nature and did not mention the assessee nor identify any specific invoice or the quantity of goods and work transaction. Such statements cannot constitute conclusive evidence against the assessee.
Since the execution of contracts and corresponding receipts had been accepted by the Department and no evidence was brought on record to establish that the documents were fabricated or that no materials were delivered, ITAT Mumbai established the purchase delivery and consumption of materials and dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs 1.07 crore.
About Author
Saima
Content Writer
Saima is a Law graduate with a passion for research and content writing. She writes for Finance, Taxation and Legal Updates at Studycafe.in, simplifying complex legal decisions by the ITAT, High Court, AAR and GSTAT into uncomplicated and clear explanations.
Saima is a Law graduate with a passion for research and content writing. She writes for Finance, Taxation and Legal Updates at Studycafe.in, simplifying complex legal decisions by the ITAT, High Court, AAR and GSTAT into uncomplicated and clear explanations.
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
320My Recent Articles
- ICAI Holds CA Not Guilty of Other Misconduct Over Examination Centre IncidentPremium
- ICAI Holds CA Not Guilty for Failure to Communicate with Previous AuditorPremium
- ICAI Board of Discipline Holds CA Not Guilty in Copyright Misconduct ComplaintPremium
- ICAI Board of Discipline Discharges CA in Auditor Communication DisputePremium
- ICAI Board Holds CA Not Guilty of Misconduct Over Rs 50 Lakh Yarn Bank ProjectPremium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts
All Posts
Recent Posts
All Posts







