ITO 19 (3)(3), MUMBAI vs. SHRENIK CHAMPALAL JAIN, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6909/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 December 2019AY 2010-114 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 found the CIT(A)'s order restricting the addition to 4% of the alleged bogus purchases to be fair and reasonable. The assessee had accepted the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer reopened the assessee's assessments for AYs 2010-11 and 2011-12 based on information of obtaining bogus purchase bills. Additions were made at 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO on account of bogus purchases was justified, and if the restriction by the CIT(A) was appropriate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

For Respondent: Shri R.Bhoopathi, DR

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A), Mumbai 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT, Mumbai 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →