ACIT-19(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. STAR BRILLIAN, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2392/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 June 2026AY 2008-0911 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to reduce the addition to 2% of the disputed purchases, following its own prior ruling on identical facts for the assessee. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the appellate authority's conclusion.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a diamond trading firm, had purchases questioned by the AO who alleged they were accommodation entries. The AO added a profit element of 5% on these purchases. The CIT(A) reduced this to 2% following a previous ITAT order in the assessee's own case.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the genuineness of purchases and the validity of reopening the assessment. The Tribunal also considered the extent of profit to be added on alleged bogus purchases.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आदेश की प्रतितलतप अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

P a g e | 11 ITA No. 1757 & 2392/Mum/2026 A.Y. 2008-09 M/s Star Brillian 3. आयकर आय क्त / CIT 4. दिभागीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यादपि प्रदि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अतधकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →