Babulal C. Borana v. ITO

Kaysons Agencies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 20, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year:2007-08

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘ए’ ,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘A’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Assessment Year:2007-08 Kaysons Agencies Private Ltd. ACIT, 27, Chottalal Bhavan, Circle-4(2), बनाम/ Kalbadevi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400020 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AAACK4485C Assessment Year: 2006-07 Kaysons Agencies Private Ltd. ACIT, 27, Chottalal Bhavan, Circle-4(2), बनाम/ Kalbadevi Road,…

DCIT 15(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sterling Electro Enterparises P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and the CO of the assessee are decided protanto

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit-15(3)(2), फनाभ/ Sterling Electro Enterprises R.No. 451, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt Ltd., Vs. 101-106, Exim Link 1 St Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Mulund Goregaon Road, Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup (W), Mumbai-78. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcs6528H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) C.O. No.175/M/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1506/M/2015) (Ay 2009-2010) Sterling Electro Enterprises Pvt फनाभ/ Dcit-15(3)(2), R.No. 451, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Ltd., Vs. 101-106, Exim Link 1 St Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mulund Goregaon Road, 20. Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup (W), Mumbai-78. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcs6528H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Revenue By : Dr. A.K. Nayak, Dr

…ct that the utilisation of goods has been proved by the appellant and has also been accepted by the CIT (A) and therefor disallowance cannot be sustained as per the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Babulal C Borana Vs. Third ITO (2006) 282 ITR 251 (Bom.) and CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P) Ltd (2013) 216 Taxman 171 (Bom.). 2. Without prejudice to ground no.1, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) has erred in arbitrarily estimating the profit at the rate of 15% of the alleged bogus purchases by wrongly relying on the decision of the Gujarat High…

ACIT 19(2), Mumbai vs. P.B. Metal Corporation, Mumbai

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ जेजेजेजे” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“J”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./4150/Mum/2015, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 व…

DCIT 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Srs Pharmaceuticals P Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./825/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./7728/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./826/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 वष" Dy.Cit-2(3)(2) M/S. Srs Pharmaceuticals Pvt.Ltd. Room No.556, 5Th Floor, 601-605, 6Th Floor, Marathon Max Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Building No.2,Lbs Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mulund Goregaon Link Road, Mulund (W),Mumbai-400080 Pan:Aafcs 4633 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri A.K. Nayak- Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Rahul Hakani सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:29.03.2017 लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders,Dated 7/10/2014 & 16/9/2014,Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai, The Assessing Officer(Ao)Has Filed The Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Ay.S. As The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical,So,We Are Disposing Them The Same By A Single Common Order.Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Supply Of Avant Grade Pharmaceuticals.The Details Of Dates Of Filing Of Returns, Returned Incomes,Dates Of Assessment Etc. Can Be Summarised As Under: Ay Roi Filed On Returned Income Assessment Date Assessed Income 2009-10 26/09/2009 Rs.4.11 Crores 27/03/2014 Rs.5.18 Crores 2010-11 26/09/2010 Rs.6.04 Crores 23/03/2013 Rs.7.63 Crores 2011-12 26/09/2011 Rs.6.55 Crores 27/03/2014 Rs.8.00 Crores

…sallowed by the AO could not be disallowed u/s.37 merely because the suppliers had not been produced before the AO.He referred to the cases of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Private Limited. (Income Tax Appeal Number 5604 of 2010, dated 17/12/2012)Babulal C. Borana(282 ITR 251) and Rajeev Kalathil of the Tribunal. Finally, he deleted the disallowance made by the AO. 4.During the course of hearing before us, the Departmental Representative (DR) relied upon the order of the AO. The Authorised Representative (AR) supported the order of the FAA. 5.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We f…

DCIT 13(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Nihar Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ( Account Member)

…based on presumption bests. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that addition made by the AO deserves to be deleted in its entirety.” 6.10 It is also submitted that in the case of Babulal C. Borana VS. ITO 282 ITR 251 (Bom). ITO vs. Surana Trading 92 lTD 212 (Mumbai ITAT) support the appellant. 6.11 Recently, the Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Shri Ganpatraj A Sanghai vs ACIT 15(3) Mumbai ITA No 2825/Mum/2013 order dated 05.11.2014 has deleted the addition of Rs.1,74,01,436/- made on account of presuming bogus purchases. The finding of the Hon’ble ITAT is as und…

Nihaar Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 13(1)(1)

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ( Account Member)

…based on presumption bests. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that addition made by the AO deserves to be deleted in its entirety.” 6.10 It is also submitted that in the case of Babulal C. Borana VS. ITO 282 ITR 251 (Bom). ITO vs. Surana Trading 92 lTD 212 (Mumbai ITAT) support the appellant. 6.11 Recently, the Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Shri Ganpatraj A Sanghai vs ACIT 15(3) Mumbai ITA No 2825/Mum/2013 order dated 05.11.2014 has deleted the addition of Rs.1,74,01,436/- made on account of presuming bogus purchases. The finding of the Hon’ble ITAT is as und…

Asst CIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Metcraft Engineering Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Acit – 25(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Metcraft Engineering Corporation, 601-602, Siddarth Arcade, 3 Lt Road, Borivali (W), Mumbai – 400 092 Pan/Gir No. Aaafm1677M Appellant) .. Respondent)

…t in the case of the Babulal C Borana v. Third Income Tax Officer and others and the Delhi High Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income Tax h. M/s. Radhika Creation. 6.3.4. I have further considered the following decisions: (1) Babulal C Borana V ITO (282 ITR 251) (2) Vijay Proteins vs ACIT (1996) 55 DJ 76 (Ahm) (3) Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd Vs CIT-1 Mumbai (Bombay High Court) Income tax Section 260A- Whether disallowance regarding purchases made, can be made merely on the basis that the suppliers and other relating evidences are not produced before the assessing authority or before the first appel…

ITO 31(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Manjula S. Shah, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Mrs. Manjula S. Shah, Room No.704, C-11, Prop. Of M/S Eastment बनाम/ Pratayaksha Kar Bhavan, Chemicals, 3/202, Rishabh Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mansion, S.V.Road, Nr. St. Bandra(East), John School, Mumbai-400051 Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400062 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aapps3790Q

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,‘जी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘G’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Mrs. Manjula S. Shah, Room No.704, C-11, Prop. Of M/s Eastment बनाम/ Pratayaksha Kar Bhavan, Chemicals, 3/202, Rishabh Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mansion, S.V.Road, Nr. St. Bandra(East), John School, Mumbai-400051 Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400062 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No. A…

ACIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Chirag Construction, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit-25(1), M/S Chirag Construction Room No.202, 02Nd Floor, Company, बनाम/ Pratayakshkar Bhavan, 105, Gopal Puri, S.V.Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Borivali (W), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400066 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) (""यथ" /Respondent) Pan. No.Aacfc7646N

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘सी’ ,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘C’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 ACIT-25(1), M/s Chirag Construction Room No.202, 02nd Floor, Company, बनाम/ Pratayakshkar Bhavan, 105, Gopal Puri, S.V.Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Borivali (W), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400066 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) (""यथ" /Respondent) PAN. No.AACFC7646N Shri A. Ramachandran-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by ""यथ" क" ओ…

ACIT 29(1), Mumbai vs. Jagdish Thakkar, Mumbai

…of the Act. 3.Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority(FAA) and made elaborate submissions.He relied upon the cases of the JMD Computer(321 ITR 6) and Prakashchand (301 ITR 134), Babulal Borana (282 ITR 251) and Rajeev J Kalatha (ITA/1627/Mum/2012). After considering the submissions of the assessee and the assessment order, the FAA held that onus to prove the genuineness of the expenditure was on the assessee, that by furnishing the bills and delivery challans relating to the purchases of the goods he had discharged the onus,that payments for purcha…

ITO 24(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Manjula S. Shah, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is hereby Dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.6004/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer 24(3)(2) बनाम/ Mrs. Manjula S. Shah Room No.704, C-11, Prop. Of M/S.Eastmen Vs. Pratayaksha Kar Bhavan, Chemicals, 3/202, Bandra Kurla Complex, Rishabh Mansion, S.V.Road, Bandra (East), Nr. St. John School, Mumbai - 400051 Goregaon (W), Mumbai - 400062 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aapps3790Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

…11 of accounts are not rejected purchase can not be disallowed also. The appellant has also relied on the following case laws:- 1. ACIT Vs. AA Testronics Solutions Pvt. Ltd. – ITA Nos.4223 to 4228/Del/2012 – Delhi Tribunal 2. Babulal C. Borana Vs. ITO [2006] 282 ITR 251 (Bom) 3. Balaji Textile Industries (P.) Ltd. Vs. ITO [1994] 49 ITD 177 (Mum) Since the appellant has not been able to furnish the Ledger confirmation from the party, to buy peace of mind and to avoid ruinous litigation, the appellant requested to estimate an appropriate rate of G.P. margin on the purchases of Rs.22,12,600/- effected from M/s.Rid…

ACIT-21(1), Mumbai vs. Karan Builders & Associated, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Acit- 21(1), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Karan Builders & Associates, 31, Jaihind Cottage, Shahji Raje Marg, Vile Parle – E, Mumbai - 57 Pan/Gir No. Aaffk5037N Appellant) .. Respondent)

…by consumption of materials. The contract receipts of the assessee have not been doubted by the AO. Once the sales(contract receipts} has been accepted as genuine, then it is not possible to say that the purchases are bogus as held in case of Babulal C Borara 282 ITR 251(BOM.). It is noted that the purchase of cement from Mls P D Sales during the year is of 11.36 lacs and from M/s J K Trading is of Rs 11.38 lacs on a turnover of more than 12.76 Crores. Thus the purchases from these two parties (even if non verifiable) are only 0.89 % of total purchases made by assessee. It is not that the purchases from these two…

Govind Bhilu Rathod, Vasai vs. ITO WD 4(1), Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accepted

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No 439/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No 439/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Govind Bhilu Rathod , ITO Ward (4) (1) बनाम/ C-301, Everest Tower, Thane. Vasant Nagri, Sector- 8 Vs. Vasai Road(E), 401208 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No.AEIPR7254M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Arvind Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / : 10/10/2016 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 14/10/2016 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D…

Allied Engineers and Elastomers, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S Allied Engineers & Income Tax Officer-18(1)(1), Elastomers, Earnest House, बनाम/ 404-A, Waghwadi, Mumbai Vs. Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai-400002 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Aahfa7945H

…. ITO v/s Shri Paresh Arvind Gandhi (ITA NO 5706/Mum/2013 dt 13.05,2015 , iii. ACIT, V/s Shri Ramila Pravin Shah (ITA NO 5246/ Mum/2013 dt 05.03.2015 , iv. ACIT V/s M/s G. V. Sons (ITA NOS 2238/2239/2240/ Mum/20l2 dt 05.12.2014, v. Babulal C.Borana V/s ITO 282 ITR 251 (Bom) vi. CIT V/s M.K. Brothers 163 ITR 249 (Guj) vii. C1T V/s Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd. 216 Taxman 171 (Mag)(Bom) viii. ITO V/s Eagle Impex (ITA no. 5697/Mum./2010) ix. J.H. Metals V/s ITO 77ITD 71 (ASR)(TM) x. G.G. DIAMOND INTERNATIONAL v/s DCIT 104 TT) 809 (Mum) xi. ITO v/s Surana Traders 921TD 212 (Mum) xii. M/s Vijay Protiens…

ITO 25(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Pankaj Enterprises, Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./5238/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-25(2)(2) M/S. Pankaj Enterprises 46-A, 2Nd Floor, Ganjawala Apt. No.2 C-11 Bldg., Room No.106, Pratyakshakar Vs. Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Ganjawala Lane,Borivali(W),Mumbai-92. Mumbai-400 051. Pan:Aaafp 2176 J (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" Revenue By: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang-Dr Assessee By: None सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30.06.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 10.05.2013,Of The Cit (A)-35, Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Has Filed The Present Appeal.None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee .We Are Deciding The Appeal On Merits After Hearing The Departmental Representative (Dr).

…all circumstances of the claim, that in the case of the assessee the AO had neither established that the sellers were incapable of making the sales nor that any of the sellers were employees of the assessee. He further relied upon the case of Babulal C Borana(282 ITR 251) and Arora Alloys Ltd.(12 Trib 263). 5238/M/13-Pankaj Referring to the provisions of section 69C of the Act, the FAA held that the conditions mentioned in the section were not applicable, that payment claimed by the assessee had been recorded in the regular books of accounts of the assessee, that the AO had not disputed the basic fact, that the…

G.L. Constructions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1) Or DCIT City 8, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

…tax authority regarding supplier being non- genuine. Reliance was placed by ld. AR on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sunrise Tolling Pvt. Ltd., 361 ITR 206, Bombay High Court in the case of Nikunj Exim, 372 ITR 619 and Babulal Borana, 282 ITR 251 (Bom HC), Gujarat High Court in the case of Atma Prakash Batra, 340 ITR 177 and Sumit P Sheth, 356 ITR 451. It was further contended that no material was found during survey with regard to any bogus purchases nor books of account was rejected, therefore, when the AO has accepted the corresponding sales/utilisation of material, the disallowance of…

ACIT 25(3), Mumbai vs. Rajeev G Kalathil, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5312/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Rajeev G Kalathil, Tax -25(3), M-605, Regency Park, Vs. 308, C-11, Rna Millennium Township, Bandra-Kurla Complex, M G Road, Kandivali (W), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400067 Mumbai-400051 (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

…rance Services Ltd V/s DCIT 62 DTR 349 /(2011)12 Taxman.com 424 (Mum); vi) Rajmal Lakhichand V/s ACIT 79 ITD 84 vii) Kishinchand Chellaram V/s CIT 125 ITR713 (Supreme Court) viii) Kanchanwala Gems -122 TTJ 854, Jaipur Bench ITAT; ix) Babulal C Borana V/s ITO (282 ITR 251) (Bombay High Court); x) CIT V/s M/s Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd 2013 TIOL-04-HC-MUM-IT, 17.12.2012 While elaborating the applicability of provisions of section 69C of the Act, the ld.CIT(A) in para 6.3.8.1 has observed and held as under : “6.3.8.1. The Assessing Officer has applied Section 69C in making addition as unexplained expenditure…

Asst CIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Tarla R Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5295/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax - Tarla R Shah 25(2), Room No.108, 1st Floor, Prop. Of M/s K R Construction बनाम/ Bldg. No. C-11, Pratyakshakar A-1201, Aditya Tower, Bhavan,Bandra Kurla Complex, Chandavarkar Lane Road, Vs. Bandra (East), Borivali(w), Mumbai-400 051. Mumbai-400 092. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AMOPS 3922M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : : Shri J. Saravanan अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant…