Saryu Properties and Hotels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai
In the result this appeal by the assessee stands dismissed
ITA 5674/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2018AY 2011-12
Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5674/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Saryu Properties & Hotels Pvt. Dcit-Cc 4(2), 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Ltd. बनाम/ Plot No. 25, Girnar, ‘B’Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. 1St Floor, Pali Mala Road, Pali Hill, Bandra (W), Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs 6983 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Sunil K. Ramaro & Shri Vinay Sinha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. V. Rajguru सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 02.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 04.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai Dated 30.06.2016 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. The Learned Cit (A) Erred In Not Admitting The Additional Grounds Relating To Disallowance U/S I4-A Holding That The Said Disallowance Was In The Original
For Appellant: Shri Sunil K. Ramaro &For Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A
…The Learned Assessing Officer failed to appreciate (i) that the payment for the said purchases had been made by A/c, Payee Cheques; (ii) that the goods were received for the running of the Appellant's Hotels and (Hi) that as he held in ITO vs. Kanchwala Gems 33 SOT 27 (JP) once the transaction is over, the Appellant ceases to have control over seller to produced him before the Assessing Officer. 4. At para 5.2 of the order the Assessing Officer states that the 12 parties' statements had been recorded by Sales Tax Authorities which prove that the parties are genuine and their identity stands proved and therefore…
