Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. ITO

Juliet Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…r conclusion. The function of the Assessing Officer is to administer the statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Chirag Rajendra Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 24(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4086 To 4088/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Mr. Chirag Rajendra Shah Ito, Ward 24(1)(4), 502, 5Th Floor, C-13, D-305, Siddhi Vinayak Tower, बनाम/ Off Tank Road, Orlem, Malad, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-64 Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afxps 7904 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. K. Sharma & Ms. Taneshka Sharma ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that Mr. Chirag Rajendra Shah stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not…

Simplex Metal & Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.222/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Simplex Metal & Alloys Ito-19(3)(3) Shop No. 25, Ground Floor, Room No. 202, Matru Mandir, बनाम/ Harharwala Building, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 Vs. Ardeshir Dady Street, S.V.P. Road, Near Alankar Cinema, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfs 5871 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 28.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 02.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 10.10.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2010- 11. 2. The Issue Raised Relates To The Validity Of Reopening & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.13,78,911/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases.

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Mircon Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 10(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 47 & 48/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Mircon Infrastructure Private Limited Ito, Ward 10(2)(4), 505/506, Shalimar Morya Park, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 बनाम/ New Lind Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 053 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcm 1309 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Vishal Tube Industries, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6527/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Vishal Tube Industries Ito-19(3)(5), 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Badrika Ashram Building, बनाम/ Ground Floor, 92, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 Nanubhai Desai Road, Vs. Dhetwadi Main Road, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadfv 5562 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 26.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 26.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 25.09.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Issue Raised Relates To The Validity Of Reopening Of Assessment & Addition @ 12.50% Of Alleged Bogus Purchases.

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Nyka Steels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Panvel, Panvel

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3737/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Nyka Steels Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Cit, Panvel Circle, बनाम/ C-17/6, Midc, Taloja Area, Panvel Vs. Panvel, Dist. Raigad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfn 7647 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ram Tiwari सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 10.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 01.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 21.03.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2009- 10. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated U/S 147 By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 M/S. Nyka Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Cit 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Disallowance Of Genuine Purchases Of Rs.1,51,97,687/- As Bogus Purchase From Suspicious Parties. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Levy Of Interest U/S 234B & 234C Of Income Tax Act. 4. On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Initiation Of Penalty Proceeding U/S 271Fl)(C) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The E-Return Of Income Was Filed On 12.09.2009 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,15,41,380/-. Scrutiny Under Section 143(3) Was Completed On 13.12.2011 Determining Total Income Of Rs 2,23,69,210/-. Subsequently

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established 6 M/s.…

Ritu Sanjay Mantry, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(4), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2003/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ritu Sanjay Mantry Ito-24(3)(4), बनाम/ C-24, Padma Nagar, Mumbai Andheri Kurla Road, Vs. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 099 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aghpm 2569 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nishit Gandhi ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mrs. N. Hemlatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 30.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 20.01.2017 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1) On Facts & Circumstances Of Case & In Law, Ld.Ao Erred In Reopening The Completed Assessment On Issuing The Notice U/S. 148 Without Having A Valid Reason To Believe 'That Income Had Escaped Assessment & Without

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Alpa P. Parekh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 27(1), Navi Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5894/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Alpa P. Parekh I.T.O. Ward – 27(1)(1) A/401, Krishna Bldg., It Office, Vashi Railway Station बनाम/ Vasant Sagar Complex, Building, Navi Mumbai Thakur Village, Kandivali (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpp 8359 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) 5 Alpa P. Parekh vs. ITO fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but no…

Shakeeluddin Siddiqui, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-2(4), Thane

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 5118 To 5120/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Shri Shakeeluddin Siddiqui Ito-2(4), Room No. 29, A-Wing, 6Th Floor, 603, Gulmohar Co-Op. Hsg. Society, बनाम/ Saraswati Tower, Naya Nagar, Ashar I. T. Park, Road No. 16-Z, Vs. Ganga Complex, 60 Feet Road, Wagle Indl. Estate, Thane-400 604 Mira Road (E), Dist. Thane-400 107 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Ajwps 5271 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 05.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: These Are Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 02.05.2017 & Pertain To The Aforesaid Three Assessment Years.

…finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Shri Shakeeluddin Siddiqui vs. ITO Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Navnidhi Steel and Engg Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

…r conclusion. The function of the Assessing Officer is to administer the statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfilment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of e…

Haresh K. Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-17(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4975/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Haresh K. Sanghvi Ito-17(1)(5), Prop. M/S. Mahavir Metal Syndicate Room No. 117, Aaykar Bhavan, बनाम/ 35/37, Bapu Khote Lane, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Vs. Gulal Wadi, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Ajvps 5483 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Praful L. Vora ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Sangeeta Ghanshyam Patel, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-32(3), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4583, 4584 & 4585/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Sangeeta Ghanshyam Patel Acit-32(3), बनाम/ C-11, 1St Floor, Bkc, 1211 C, National Park View, Paheja Estate, Borivali, Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Mumbai-400 066 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Agtpp 4539 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punamiya & Shri Darshan Gandhi ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 01.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: These Are Appeals By The Assessee Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) For Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since The Issues Are Common, These Appeals Were Heard Together & They Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Tubes India, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee and the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2230 To 2232/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Tubes India The Asst. Cit, Circle 19(3), बनाम/ 11/15, 2Nd Pathan Street, Room No. 206, 2Nd Floor, Kumbharwada 5Th Lane, Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Mumbai-400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaet 4281 A (Assessee) : (Revenue) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3145 To 3147/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) The Asst. Cit, Circle 19(3), Tubes India बनाम/ Room No. 206, 2Nd Floor, 11/15, 2Nd Pathan Street, Kumbharwada 5Th Lane, Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Vs. Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 004 (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Chamaria : Shri M. C. Omi Ningshan Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 05.12.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 07.12.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals By The Assessee & The Revenue Arising Out Of The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2009-10 To 2011-12. 2. The Common Grounds Of Appeal In Assessee’S Case Read As Under:

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Hasmukh I Gandhi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee’s stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Chintan H Gandhi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee’s stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Hasmukh I Gandhi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee’s stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Reliant Pipes & Tubes P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3383/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Reliant Pipes & Tubes Pvt. Ltd. Ito-5(3)(1), बनाम/ 3/5, Ground Floor, Sakar Bhavan, Aayakar Bhawan, 6Th Khetwadi Lane, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcr 8444 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 31.08.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 01.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 20.01.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under:

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Shree Chemtech Marketing P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Sumit M. Malhotra, Kalyan vs. ITO 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6697 & 6698/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Mr. Sumit M. Malhotra Income-Tax Officer 3(4), Rani Mansion, 2Nd Floor, C/O. M/S. S. M. Steel Traders बनाम/ 702, “A” Wing, Archies Apartment, Murbad Road, Vs. Oak Baug, Near Railway Station, Kalyan (W) – 421 301 Kalyan (W) – 421 301 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaypm 8541 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Justin

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by lega/ statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, Itd. v. ITO(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…

Bhaveshwar Traders, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2730/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Bhaveshwar Traders Astt. Cit-31(1), बनाम/ Gala No. 15, Guffa Road, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Opp. Jain Mandir, Jogeshwari (E), Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 060 Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaifb 5683 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Mistry ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 29.08.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 12.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 28.12.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10. 2. The Issue Raised Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 100% Of Bogus Purchase, Amounting To Rs.22,39,511/-. The Assessee Has Also Raised Ground Challenging The Reopening Of This Case.

…ead to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers. As observed by the Supreme Court in Central Provinces Managnese Ore Co, ltd. v. 170(1991) 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfillment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential. At that stage, the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of…