VEGA JEWELLERY,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3794/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 August 2021AY 2009-103 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the estimation of 3% made by the CIT(A) to be fair and reasonable, considering the factual matrix of the case. Therefore, the estimation could not be interfered with.

What were the facts?

The assessee was subjected to estimated additions of 8% on purchases from suspicious entities. The CIT(A) reduced this estimation to 3%. The assessee appealed this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the estimation of additions on account of alleged bogus purchases made by the CIT(A) was fair and reasonable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Shah – Ld. AR
For Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad, Ld. Sr. DR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “एफ” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एवुं माननीय श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल ,लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Vega Jewellery ITO- 19(3)(5), बिाम/ 101, Shreeji Darshan Mumbai Tata Road, 1 & 2, Opera House Vs. Mumbai-400 004 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ PAN/GIR No. AAEFV-2026-M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Bharat Shah – Ld. AR Revenue by : Ms. Usha Gaikwad, Ld. Sr. DR ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 03/08/2021 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

During hearing of the appeal, Ld. AR submitted that only issue that arises under the appeal is estimated addition on account of alleged bogus purchases. The Ld. AR, drawing attention to the facts of the cases, submitted that estimation of 3% as made by learned CIT(Appeals)—30, Mumbai in order dated 20/03/2017 is on the higher side. No other ground was urged by Ld. AR. The Ld. DR pleaded for dismissal of appeal.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →