CIT v. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd.

Principle Commissioner O Income Tax-42, Mumbai vs. Sunil Govind Agre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1615/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Pr. Commissioner Of बिधम/ Sunil Govind Agre Income Tax-42 Room No.21, Plot Vs. Ito-42(1)(5), Mumbai No.255, Sankalp Society, Room No.945, 9Th Floor, Sector-2, Charkop, Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc, Kandivali, West, Bandra, East, Mumbai- Mumbai-400067. 400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aegpa0962H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ganesh Rakh (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 15.03.2023 For The Ay. 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,63,62,790/- Which Was Added By The Ao Since The Assessee Failed To Prove The Purchases As Genuine. & Ld Cit(A) Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee By Restricting The Addition At Rs.4,99,264/- I.E. 0.31% Gross Profit (Gp) Of Rs.16,10,52,959/-.

…e parties for verification before him. AO held that appellant failed to discharge the onus to prove the genuineness of existence of party and transaction. Reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT vs Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. in 232 ITR 820 where it was held that initial burden was upon the assessee to prove genuineness of purchases. AO held that appellant failed to establish the quantity of goods corresponding to bogus purchases was actually sold by him in trading activity. In view of the above the AO made addition u/s. 69C to the extent of 100% purchases made from M/s. UGTL. 7.5 F…

M/S. Paras Plastic Processors, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-27(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Paras Plastic Processors, Income Tax Officer 806/807, Ajit Nath, Ward-27(2)(5), Nilkantha Enclave, Ajit Nagar, Vs. Vashi, Opp. Shreyash Cinema, Navi Mumbai-400-703. Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400086. Pan No. Aaefp 8206 H Appellant Respondent

…regards reliance is place on decision of with these parties. In this regards reliance is place on decision of Honble Calcu Honble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Korlay Trading tta High Court in the case of CIT vs Korlay Trading Co. Ltd reported in 232 ITR 820 where the Hon'ble court has held Co. Ltd reported in 232 ITR 820 where the Hon'ble court has held Co. Ltd reported in 232 ITR 820 where the Hon'ble court has held that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the genuineness of pu…

Dy CIT Circle-33 (1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Vishal Praful Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Saktijit Dey (Jm) I.T.A. No.6843 & 6117/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12)

…. No serious efforts were made by the assessee to discharge such burden proving the genuineness of the transaction with these parties. In this regard reliance is place on decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Korlay Trading Co. Ltd reported in 232 ITR 820 where the Hon'ble court has held that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the genuineness of purchases. 6. Upon assessee’s appeal Ld.CIT(A) restricted the addition to 12.5% by holding as under:- “ I have gone through the assessment order. The AO held in the assessment order that even though the appellant produced the details (para 4.7…

Shri. Dinesh B Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed partly

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

…hat a purchaser could he unable to furnish requisite information with respect to purchases made by it. 6.7 Initial burden to prove genuineness of purchases is on assessee. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta has held so in CIT v. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. [1998] 232 ITR 820 (Cal.) (HC).Sec.37 deals with the question relating to the allowability of the expenditure incurred for the purposes of business. The onus of proof is upon the assessee to prove each of the following ingredients -(a) the item of expenditure must not be of the nature described tinder sections 30 to 36 of the Act; (b) the item of expenditure must n…

ACIT 22 (1), Mumbai vs. Cyprian Anthony Mascarenhas, Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

…o prove that direct correlation between the purchases made and corresponding sales. The onus of proving the genuineness of the purchase lies on the assessee as per the ruling of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. reported in 232 ITR 820 where it was held that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the genuineness of the purchases. 3. The AO had also relied on the decision in the case of M/s Kachwala Gems vs. JCIT wherein it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the even payment made by account payee cheque is not sufficient to establish the genuineness of purc…