What is CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee makes purchases from bogus parties, but the underlying goods are genuinely acquired and sold, only the profit margin embedded in such purchases, and not the entire value of the bogus purchases, should be added to the assessee's income.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.?

712 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (355 ITR 290), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 147, Section 37(1), Section 153A, Section 132.

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (355 ITR 290)

ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan vs. Pushpak Auxichem P.Ltd, Thane

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3297/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, M/S Pushpak Auxichem Pvt. Ward-1(3), Ltd. बनाम/ 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, 804, Iris, 8Th Floor, Vs. Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Regency Estate, Bldg. No.7, Kalyan (West), Dayaneshwar Ngar, Kalyan, Maharashtra-421301 Shill Road, Dombivali (East), Thane (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aabcp0099E

…ed. Hon'ble Apex Court in Kachwala Gems vs JCIT (2007) 158 taxman 71 observed that an element of guesswork is inevitable in cases, where estimation of income is warranted. 2.2. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) held/observed as under:- “5. Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the purchases may have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus. The Tribunal adverted to the facts and data on record and came to the conclusion that the entire quantity of opening stock,…

Sunil Great (Hyk) Processors P.Ltd, Bhiwandi vs. Asst CIT Cir 1, Kalyan

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3270/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunil Great (Hyk) Processors Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1 बनाम/ House No. 1, Green Park, 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Vs. A-Wing, 1St Floor, Wayale Nagar Khandakpada, Bhiwandi-421302 Kalyan (W), Maharashtra-421301 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aajcs1619M

…med. Hon'ble Apex Court in Kachwala Gems vs JCIT (2007) 158 taxman 71 observed that an element of guesswork is inevitable in cases, where estimation of income is warranted. 2.2. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) held/observed as under:- “5. Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the purchases may have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus. The Tribunal adverted to the facts and data on record and came to the conclusion that the entire quantity of opening stock…

Manish D. Mandhania, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 33(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1211/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Shaktijit Dey, Jm

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Shri Purshottam Kumar

Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…the details filed indicate that the purchases were made without which the assessee could not have declared the sales made. It is noted that only profit element is liable to tax in such cases as was held in the case of: 1. CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) (HC) 2. CIT vs Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) (HC) 3. CIT vs Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (HC) 4. ITO vs Permanand (2007) 107 TTJ 395 0d) (Trib.) 5. Shri Madhukant B. Gandhi vs ITO ITA No. 1950/M/2009 Bench 'B' dt. 23-02-2010 (AY 2005-06) (Mum.) (Trib.) 5 ITA No.1211/Mum/2017. Shri Manish D.Mandhania. 6. San…

Mayur Shrimankar, Mumbai vs. ITO-21(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2906/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 51Section 69C

…rmed. Hon'ble Apex Court in Kachwala Gems vs JCIT (2007) 158 taxman 71 observed that an element of guesswork is inevitable in cases, where estimation of income is warranted. 3.1. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) held/observed as under:- “5. Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the purchases may have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus. The Tribunal adverted to the facts and data on record and came to the conclusion that the entire quantity of opening stock…

Nitin Avantilal Doshi, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)32, Mumbai

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

ITA 730/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 730/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Nitin Avantilal Doshi Cit(A)-32, बनाम/ Gala No.3 To 5, Plot No. 13-A, Mumbai Magazine Street, Darukhana, Reay Vs. Road Rly Station, Mumbai-400 010 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpd 1214 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ram Tiwari सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 07.09.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 03.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Learned Cit(A)-32, Mumbai Dated 06.01.2015 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Issue Raised Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 12.5% Of Bogus Purchase Amounting To Rs.23,13,873/-.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…,13,873/- only and the appellant got relief of Rs.1,61,97,107 (Rs. 1,85,10,980/- - Rs.23,13,873/-). The appellant also relied on the decisions in the cases of Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs it P Sheth ,356 ITR 451 and M/s. Bholenath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. Vs AO, 355 ITR 290. In the decisions the GP/NP should be adopted to decide just type of cases. CIT V/s. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) Held, dismissing the appeal, that whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly ma.de were bogus was essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having e…

Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5801/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay BiyaniFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

…d there were no real transactions. Ld.CIT(A) also accepted the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing certain percentage of impugned purchases in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] and CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451]. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) taking note of the report of the task group for M/s. Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P. Ltd Diamond Sector Submitted to Department of Commerce wherein the net profit margin in diamond manufacturing and trading was reported in the range of 1.5% to 4.5% and 1% to 3% respectively, he concluded…

Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5800/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay BiyaniFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

…d there were no real transactions. Ld.CIT(A) also accepted the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing certain percentage of impugned purchases in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] and CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451]. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) taking note of the report of the task group for M/s. Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P. Ltd Diamond Sector Submitted to Department of Commerce wherein the net profit margin in diamond manufacturing and trading was reported in the range of 1.5% to 4.5% and 1% to 3% respectively, he concluded…

Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5799/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay BiyaniFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

…d there were no real transactions. Ld.CIT(A) also accepted the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing certain percentage of impugned purchases in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] and CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451]. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) taking note of the report of the task group for M/s. Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P. Ltd Diamond Sector Submitted to Department of Commerce wherein the net profit margin in diamond manufacturing and trading was reported in the range of 1.5% to 4.5% and 1% to 3% respectively, he concluded…

Anil Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 2494/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.2494/M/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Anil Jain बिधम/ Ito 25(2)(1) Prop Jainson Marble Centre, R.No. 701, C012 Vs. S.K. Gupta, Compound, Opp Prattakshar Bhavan, Bkc Blossom Societ, Military Rd, Mumbai - Marol, Andheri(E)Pin:400059 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaiphj4066H .. (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी /Respondent)

For Appellant: Miss NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 234B

…payments made to these parties through normal banking channel have been reflected were submitted during the asessmdent proceedings. Identical issue came up before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. P. Ltd. Reported in 355 ITR 290 (guj) In this case. The assessee was engaged in the business of trading in finished fabrics. The AO disallow3ed purchase amounting to Rs.40,69,546/- as bogus /unexplained. The CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. The issue was carried in appeal befoe the Hon’ble Tribunal which concurred with the finding of the frevenue authorities below the Hon…

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7497/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147

…before him he concluded that the purchases were not genuine. The Assessing Officer further following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and the decision in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] estimated the profit element from out of the purchases made from these two dealers at 12.5% and added as income of the assessee in all these Assessment Years. The assessee preferred appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness o…

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7496/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147

…before him he concluded that the purchases were not genuine. The Assessing Officer further following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and the decision in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] estimated the profit element from out of the purchases made from these two dealers at 12.5% and added as income of the assessee in all these Assessment Years. The assessee preferred appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness o…

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7495/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147

…before him he concluded that the purchases were not genuine. The Assessing Officer further following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and the decision in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] estimated the profit element from out of the purchases made from these two dealers at 12.5% and added as income of the assessee in all these Assessment Years. The assessee preferred appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness o…

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7494/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147

…before him he concluded that the purchases were not genuine. The Assessing Officer further following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and the decision in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] estimated the profit element from out of the purchases made from these two dealers at 12.5% and added as income of the assessee in all these Assessment Years. The assessee preferred appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness o…

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7493/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147

…before him he concluded that the purchases were not genuine. The Assessing Officer further following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and the decision in the case of Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] estimated the profit element from out of the purchases made from these two dealers at 12.5% and added as income of the assessee in all these Assessment Years. The assessee preferred appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness o…

Asst CIT Cir 2, Kalyan vs. Balkrishna Naik, Ambernath

In the result, Revenue appeals are dismissed

ITA 5590/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop

Section 144Section 147

…yment to hawala dealers but goods must have come from grey market, therefore, under such circumstances, the chances of purchase cost being inflated could not be ruled out.” 6. 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 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.com 385]. Simply becaus…

Asst CIT Cir 2, Kalyan vs. Vijay Balkrishna Naik, Ambernath

In the result, Revenue appeals are dismissed

ITA 5589/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop

Section 144Section 147

…yment to hawala dealers but goods must have come from grey market, therefore, under such circumstances, the chances of purchase cost being inflated could not be ruled out.” 6. 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 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.com 385]. Simply becaus…

DCIT 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Standard Greases & Sepcialites P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 475/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 475/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-14(3)(2), 455, M/S. Standard Greases & Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Specialities Pvt. Ltd. M.K. Marg, Mumbai- 400 020 बिधम/ 101, Ketan Apartment, 233, R.B. Mehta Marg, Patel Vs. Chowk, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai-400 077 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs2136B (अपीलाथी/Revenue) (प्रत्यथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Kisnadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.Vidyadhar, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…order dated January 10, 2011 passed in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009-since reported in [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab P. Ltd. vide order dated October 23, 2012, passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012-since reported in [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Guj). The view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd) came to be approved. If the entire purchases were wholly bogus and there was a finding of fact on record that no purchases were made at all, counsel for the Revenue would be justified in arguing that the entire amount of such bogus purcha…

ITO 19(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sunita Amit Patanwala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1195/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 144/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ........................... Assessment Year: 2010-11 & C.O. No. 143/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: ShriVimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…ent embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. The Hon’ble High Court referred to a similar view taken in the case of CIT vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Guj). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has estimated the profit @ 12.5% of the concerned purchases. It is not @ 18.5% as submitted by the Ld. counsel in the cross objection filed. following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court mentioned hereinbefore we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. Facts being similar, our decision above for the AY…

ITO 19(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sunita Amit Patanwala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1194/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 144/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ........................... Assessment Year: 2010-11 & C.O. No. 143/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: ShriVimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…ent embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. The Hon’ble High Court referred to a similar view taken in the case of CIT vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Guj). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has estimated the profit @ 12.5% of the concerned purchases. It is not @ 18.5% as submitted by the Ld. counsel in the cross objection filed. following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court mentioned hereinbefore we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. Facts being similar, our decision above for the AY…

Asst CIT 14(1), Mumbai vs. Kantilal C Jain, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6924/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11 Asst. Cit-14(1), Shri Kantilal C. Jain 2Nd Floor, Earnest House, M/S. Shailesh Jewellers बनाम/ Nariman Point, Shop No. 4, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 108/112, Ustad Building, Zaveri Bazar, Opp. Khara Kuwa, Mumbai-400 002 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aadpj 9583 E

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…med. Hon'ble Apex Court in Kachwala Gems vs JCIT (2007) 158 taxman 71 observed that an element of guesswork is inevitable in cases, where estimation of income is warranted. 5.2 The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) held/observed as under:- “5. Having come to such a conclusion, however, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the purchases may have been made from bogus parties, nevertheless, the purchases themselves were not bogus. The Tribunal adverted to the facts and data on record and came to the conclusion that the entire quantity of opening stock,…

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.

What is CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.

ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan vs. Pushpak Auxichem P.Ltd, Thane

Sunil Great (Hyk) Processors P.Ltd, Bhiwandi vs. Asst CIT Cir 1, Kalyan

Manish D. Mandhania, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 33(2), Mumbai

Mayur Shrimankar, Mumbai vs. ITO-21(1)(3), Mumbai

Nitin Avantilal Doshi, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)32, Mumbai

Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

Amy Diam Vega Jewellery P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

Anil Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2)(1), Mumbai

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

Arun Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(2), Mumbai

Asst CIT Cir 2, Kalyan vs. Balkrishna Naik, Ambernath

Asst CIT Cir 2, Kalyan vs. Vijay Balkrishna Naik, Ambernath

DCIT 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Standard Greases & Sepcialites P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITO 19(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sunita Amit Patanwala, Mumbai

ITO 19(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sunita Amit Patanwala, Mumbai

Asst CIT 14(1), Mumbai vs. Kantilal C Jain, Mumbai