CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.

ITO-8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tpp Boilers P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

…essee by restricting the addition qua to 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases by following the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth reported in 356 ITR 451 and in the case of M/s Bholanath Poly Fab. P. Ltd. reported in 355 ITR 290. 5. So far as the ground no. 1 in cross objection is concerned , we do find any merit in the same as the Circular No.03 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 as amended by Circular No. 17 dated 08.08.2019 is not applicable to the revenue appeal as it is specifically provide in the exception that where the re-opening is done on the basis of third party informa…

ACIT, Circle- 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mazda Hi-Tech Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

…bmissions made by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings and by following the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth reported in 356 ITR 451 and in the case of M/s Bholanath Poly Fab. P. Ltd. reported in 355 ITR 290. 3 M/s. Mazda Hi-Tech Electricals Pvt. Ltd. 5. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that in this case the undisputed facts are that the assessee was beneficiary of hawala purchase entries to the tune of Rs.10,98,959/-. Though the assessee has tried to substantiate and prove the genuineness of the purchas…

ITO-26(3)(5), Mumbai vs. Shri. Wajidali M H Shaikh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma: A.Y : 2010-11

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : A.Y : 2010-11 ITO – 26(3)95), Mumbai vs. Shri Wajidali M.H. Shaikh R.No.504, 5th Floor Shop No.84, 1st Targali C-11, Bandra Kurla Complex Near Madina Masjid Pratyakshakar Bhavan Tarbazar Kurla Andheri Road Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Jarimari, Mumbai Maharashtra PAN No.AOVPS1206B Revenue by : Shri Anoop Hiwase Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 27/01/2020 Date of Pronouncement : 27/01/2020 O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A…

ITO 17 (2)(5), Mumbai vs. Parindra Harshad Bhuta, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7480/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ito 17(2)(5) बिधम/ Parindra Harshad Bhuta Room No.123A, 1St Floor, 37, Ismail Building, Nagdevi Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Street, Masjid Bunder, Churchgate, Mumbai- Mumbai-400003. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaqpb4539D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Akhtar Ali Ansari (Dr) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 05.10.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -58, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

…& 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. The assesse has taken the bogus purchase entries in sum of Rs.20,67,806/-. The AO by applying the decision of Hon’ ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bholanath Ply Fab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) (355 ITR 290/40 Taxmann.com 494 (2014) 220 Taxmann 82 (Mag. (Guj) (High Court) has restricted the addition to the extent of 12.5% of the bogus purchase in sum of Rs.20,67,806/-. The total income of the assessee was assessed to the tune of Rs.17,46,230/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who restricted the addition to the exten…

ITO 24(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Naresh S. Khanna, Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…ns, the stated purchases were treated as bogus purchases and added to the income of the assessee. 3. The learned CIT(A), after considering assessee’s submissions and inter-alia, relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT V/s Simit P.Sheth (355 ITR 290) restricted the additions to 12.5% of Shri Naresh S.Khanna Assessment Year :2010-11 these purchases. The said adjudication has given rise to cross-appeals before us. The revenue is aggrieved by reduction in additions whereas the assessee is aggrieved by addition of 12.5% as sustained by Ld. CIT(A). 4. After careful consideration of orders of lowe…

DCIT - 13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Satyanis the Jewellery Store Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Ravish Soodthe Dcit-13(2)(1) M/S Satyanis The Jewellery Store Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 146, 1St Floor, Plot No. 190, Savana Court, Turner Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai - 400050

…ITA No. 3611/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 1 The DCIT-13(2)(1) Vs. M/s Satyanis The Jewellery Store Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member The DCIT-13(2)(1) M/s Satyanis The Jewellery Store Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 146, 1st Floor, Plot No. 190, Savana Court, Turner Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai - 400050 PAN – AALCS8177J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri N. Padmanaban, Sr. D.R Respondent by: Shri Hiten Vasant, A.R Date of Hearing: 08.01.2020 Date of Pronoun…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Singh Hindustan Marine Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

…e of the parties were existing at the given addresses. The assessee failed to produce any of the suppliers despite being specifically directed to do so. Consequently, Ld. AO, relying upon the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat in CIT V/s Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt Ltd. 355 ITR 290 and CIT V/s Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 estimated the additions @25% of these purchases which resulted into an addition of Rs.6.69 lacs in the hands of the assessee. 4. The learned CIT(A), after considering assessee’s submissions including net profit rate reflected during the year, scaled down the estimation to 12.5%. Aggrieved, the revenue is und…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shree Sai Steel Industries India (Private) Limited, Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of our aforesaid observations the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Ravish Sooddeputy Commissioner Of M/S Shree Sai Steel Industries India Pvt.Ltd., Income Tax-8(2)(1), 127-A, Magazine Street, Darukhana, Aayakar Bhavan, Room No.624, Mumbai - 400010 Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400020

…s further by making additions the GP/NP will increased by 26% for which there is no comparable. The ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition at 12.5% of the bogus purchases on the basis of decision of different High Courts which includes Bholanath Poly Feb Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), Sanket Steel Traders vs. ITO and the Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. ACIT 58 ITR 428 (Ahd.) and CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth [39 taxman.com 385 (Guj)] etc. We are also of the view that under Income-tax Act, the only real income can be taxed by the Revenue, even if the transaction is not verifiable due to any reason, the only taxable is the taxable incom…

ITO 26 (2)(4), Mumbai vs. Prime Steel, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhआयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 6988/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) The Income Tax Officer Prime Steel Ward 26(2)(4) 3-B/26-A, Gafoor Khan Room No. 511, 5Th Floor, C- Estate, L.B.S. Marg, Kurla बनाम/ 11, Bandra Kurla Complex, (West), Mumbai-400 070 Vs. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaifp1056B अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari, Dr प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : None ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R

…the profit embedded in such transactions depending upon the nature of business as laid down by the Hon’ble High court of Gujarat in the case of Simit P. Seth reported in 356 ITR 451 and in the case of CIT vs. M/s Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd (2013) reported in 355 ITR 290. As per the details, submitted by the 4 | P a g e Prime Steel appellant it is observed that the average gross profit % for assessment years, 2009-10 & 2010-11 and 2012-13 & 2013- 14 is 7.4% (7.15+7.25+7.51++7.78) & average net profit ratio for the said assessment year is 4.43% (3.64+4.02+5.19+5.16) wherein the issue of bogus purchase is not there…

ITO 29(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Ketan Dhirajlal Gada, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negi

…by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Simith P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) scaled down addition to 12.50% profit on alleged bogus purchases. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) are as under:- Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), where the facts of the case were that the assessee was engaged in the business of trading in finished fabrics. For the A.Y. 2005-06, the Assessing Officer held that the purchases worth Rs.40,69,546/- were unexplained. He, therefore, disallowed such expenditure claimed by the assessee and computed the total income of Rs.41,10,187/-. The iss…

Prabhuram V. Prajapati, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pawan Singh (JM) ITA No. 5956 & 5957/Mum/2018(AY : 2011-12 & 2009-10) Mr Prabhuram V Prajapati vs ITO-19(2)(5), Mumbai 23/25, L.K. Building, 5th Kumbharwada, Mumbai-400 004 PAN : AIHPP9884E APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Akhtar H Ansari Date of hearing 26-11-2019 Date of pronouncement 04-12-2019 O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, JM : 1. These two appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the common order of the learned CIT(A)-30, Mumbai dated 31-05-2018 for assessment year(AY) 200…

ITO 17 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Acme Tools Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negi

…ructions P.Ltd. (2012) 72 DTR (Kar) 258 4. ACIT vs. Acharya Texturisers and Twisters (ITA No.29/MUM/02) 5. ITAT Mumbai in the case of Shri Madhukant B.Gandhi vs. ITO in ITA No.l950/Mum/2009 Gujarat HC in the case of CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab P.Ltd. (2013] (355 ITR 290/40 Taxmann.com 494 (2014) 220 Taxmann 82 (Mag.)(Guj)(HC) information from DGIT(Inv.] about the bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.12,85,042/-for which the assessee could not furnish any corroborative evidence to prove the genuineness of the transaction by producing the alleged parties. Based on this, the AO had reason to believe that income of Rs.…

M/S.Dia Diamond Link Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-12(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

…ise, the disallowance of purchases is clearly in order. The action of the assessing officer of disallowing a percentage of impugned purchases is in line with the view expressed in the decisions such as in the case of CIT vs. Bholanath PolyFab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 and thereafter in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 219 Taxman 85 (Gu]. 4.5. It is noted that there is nothing distinguishable to identify the sales as corresponding to the purchases. However, the submission that the margin on trading in polished diamonds is low is supported by the report of the Task Group for Diamond Sector submitted to…

ACIT- 17(3), Mumbai vs. Rajendra A Chokshi, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit-17(3), Room No. 137 Shri Rajendra A. Chokshi, M-9 1St Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Vs. Steel Yard House Iron M.K. Marg, Mumbai- Market, Mumbai-400009. 400020. Pan No. Aacpc9930F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Bhera Ram, Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/11/2019

…s to how the items purchased from the said hawala dealers were utilized/consumed in the process of its business. Considering the above facts, the AO followed the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Ply Fab P. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) and estimated the profit @ 5% of the bogus purchases of Rs.4,88,53,382/- which comes to Rs.24,42,669/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) followed his own order for the previous assessment year 2009-10 which has been affirmed by the ITAT. In that order for th…

ITO 17 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. Ishardas Aggarwal & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Ito 17(2)(1), 1St Floor, Vs M/S Ishardas Aggarwal & Sons Room No. 134, 390, Latif House, S.T. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 009 M.K.Road, Pan : Aabfi2423E Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondednt

…essee. Accordingly, following the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of ACIT vs Arya Texturisers & Twisters (ITA No.29/Mum/2002) dated 03- 12-2005, and also the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt Ltd (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj), the AO added an amount of Rs.45,91,500/- being the profit element at 12.5% embedded in the alleged bogus purchases. 4. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) reduced the addition to the extent of 3% of transactions covered by accommodation entries, with the following observations:- “17. All submissions of the appellant is duly considered. The gross…

Ravindra P. Jadhav, Mumbai vs. ITO - WD - 3 (5), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…receipts and also produced the parties. However, the lower authorities have not doubted the sales made by the assessee, without there being purchases there cannot be any sales. Further, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd [355 ITR 290] held that when the assessee made purchases and sold the finished goods as a natural corollary not the entire amount covered under such purchases would be Shri Ravindra P. Jadhav subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [38 taxman…

Ravindra P. Jadhav, Mumbai vs. ITO - WD - 3 (5), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…receipts and also produced the parties. However, the lower authorities have not doubted the sales made by the assessee, without there being purchases there cannot be any sales. Further, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd [355 ITR 290] held that when the assessee made purchases and sold the finished goods as a natural corollary not the entire amount covered under such purchases would be Shri Ravindra P. Jadhav subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [38 taxman…