KAPIL RAJ ANAND,DELHI V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 30, NEW DELHI, ARA CENTRE JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI

ITA 873/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves twin appeals by Sh. Kapil Raj Anand against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, which treated his purchases from M/s. Sanjay Jain group as bogus under section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The purchases in question amounted to Rs.3,40,17,291 for the assessment year 2020-21 and Rs.23,79,987 for 2021-22. The Tribunal, after considering various judicial precedents and the nature of the assessee's business, decided to impose a lumpsum disallowance of 6% on the alleged bogus purchases, without treating it as a precedent.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827736 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhamelia vs. ACIT, PCIT Vs. Hitesh Mody (HUF), PCIT Vs. Forum Sales (P) Ltd., PCIT Vs. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd, DCIT Vs. Kohinoor Foods Ltd., DCIT Vs. Tirupati Matsup (P.) Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMISH S. GUPT
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH MAHANA
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 69C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.873 & 877/Del/2025 Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Sh. Kapil Raj Anand, C-57, 59, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi PAN: AADPA9956E (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals ITA No.873 & 877/Del/2025 for assessment years 2020-21 and 2021-22, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s orders, both dated 30.01.2025, having DINs and orders no. ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1072740858(1) and ITBA/APL/M/ 250/2024-25/1072740374(1), involving proceedings under section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Assessee by Sh. Rajesh Mahana, Adv. Department by Ms. Amish S. Gupt, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 05.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 05.01.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.873 & 877/Del/2025 2 | P a g e Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee raises his sole substantive ground challenging both the learned lower authorities’ action treating his purchases amounting to Rs.3,40,17,291 in AY 2020-21 and Rs.23,79,987/- in AY 2021-22 sourced from M/s. Sanjay Jain group, as bogus purchases under section 69C of the Act, in assessment orders dated 29.03.2023 and 27.12.2022 for AY 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 3. That being the case, both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned bogus purchases disallowance. We wish to make it clear that there is no dispute in principle that the assessee is engaged in construction business all along wherein possibility of some cash turnover could not be altogether ruled out. And that his corresponding sales have nowhere been questioned in both the lower proceedings. Various recent judicial precedents (2025) 173 taxmann.com 592 (Guj.) Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhamelia vs. ACIT; (2024) 160 taxmann.com 110 (Bom) PCIT Vs. Hitesh Mody (HUF), (2024) 160 taxmann.com 93 (Del) PCIT Vs. Forum Sales (P) Ltd.; Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.873 & 877/Del/2025 3 | P a g e (2025) 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom) PCIT Vs. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd; (2025) 178 taxmann.com 424 (Del. – Trib.) DCIT Vs. Kohinoor Foods Ltd.; and (2025) 177 taxmann.com 836 (Delhi-trib.) DCIT Vs. Tirupati Matsup (P.) Ltd. have recently decided the instant issue of bogus purchases with divergent views as well. 4. Faced with these peculiar facts, it is thus deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lumpsum disallowance @ 6% of the assessee’s alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs.3,40,17,291 in AY 2020-21 and Rs.23,79,987/- in AY 2021-22 would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computations shall follow as per law. No other ground or argument has been pressed. 5. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA No.873 & 877/Del/2025 are partly allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 5th January, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 5th January, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.873 & 877/Del/2025 4 | P a g e 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "