ITO 6(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. SHRI. RAJAN JANARDAN GHADGE, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1041/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 September 2021AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the purchases were supported by invoices, ledger extracts, and bank statements. The estimation of 12.5% was considered fair, and the depreciation disallowance was unjustified given the documentary evidence provided.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against a CIT(A) order that partially granted relief to the assessee regarding alleged bogus purchases. The AO had added back purchases of Rs. 3.87 Lacs and disallowed depreciation, but the CIT(A) restricted the addition to 12.5% and deleted the depreciation disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition for bogus purchases was justified and if depreciation on assets purchased from those parties was rightly disallowed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Ms. Smita Varma– Ld. Sr. DR

माननीय श्री छल्ला नागेन्द्र प्रसाद, न्याययक सदस्य एवुं माननीय श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल ,लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ITO – 6(2)(4) Shri Rajan Janardhan Ghadge 5th floor, R. No. 513 301, Shivai Plaza, Plot No. 79(A-3), बिाम/ Aaykar Bhavan Marol Co-Op. Industrial Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Marol Naka, Andheri (East) Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. AALPG-1327-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue by : Ms. Smita Varma– Ld. Sr. DR Assessee by : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/09/2021 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 02/09/2021 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by Revenue for AY 2010-11 arises out of the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12 Mumbai [CIT(A)] dated 26/11/2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 14/03/2016. The Ld. CIT(A) has granted partial relief to the assessee on account of alleged bogus purchases against which the revenue is in further appeal before us.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →