CIT v. La Medica

DCIT CC 5(3), Mumbai vs. Shanti Engineering Construction Co, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed and assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Shanti Engineering Construction Co., V. D.C.I.T. B-214, Arjun Centre, Central Circle 5 Govandi Station Road, Govandi Air India Building, 19Th Floor, Mumbai 400 088 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aacfs 4348 H

…clusively proved that the purchases made are bogus transactions only. (vi) The case laws on which the assessee relied upon are distinct from the case of the assessee company. Reliance is placed on decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. La Medica [250 ITR 575] 4. Thus the Assessing Officer treated the purchases made from the above parties as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. 5. The matter was carried before the Ld.CIT(A) and in the course of Appellate Proceedings the assessee filed additional evidences in the form of confirmations, Income-Tax returns of the supplier’s VAT Returns etc., and…

DCIT CC 5(3), Mumbai vs. Shanti Engineering Construction Co, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed and assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Shanti Engineering Construction Co., V. D.C.I.T. B-214, Arjun Centre, Central Circle 5 Govandi Station Road, Govandi Air India Building, 19Th Floor, Mumbai 400 088 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aacfs 4348 H

…clusively proved that the purchases made are bogus transactions only. (vi) The case laws on which the assessee relied upon are distinct from the case of the assessee company. Reliance is placed on decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. La Medica [250 ITR 575] 4. Thus the Assessing Officer treated the purchases made from the above parties as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. 5. The matter was carried before the Ld.CIT(A) and in the course of Appellate Proceedings the assessee filed additional evidences in the form of confirmations, Income-Tax returns of the supplier’s VAT Returns etc., and…

DCIT CC 5(3), Mumbai vs. Shanti Engieering Construction Co, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed and assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Shanti Engineering Construction Co., V. D.C.I.T. B-214, Arjun Centre, Central Circle 5 Govandi Station Road, Govandi Air India Building, 19Th Floor, Mumbai 400 088 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aacfs 4348 H

…clusively proved that the purchases made are bogus transactions only. (vi) The case laws on which the assessee relied upon are distinct from the case of the assessee company. Reliance is placed on decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. La Medica [250 ITR 575] 4. Thus the Assessing Officer treated the purchases made from the above parties as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. 5. The matter was carried before the Ld.CIT(A) and in the course of Appellate Proceedings the assessee filed additional evidences in the form of confirmations, Income-Tax returns of the supplier’s VAT Returns etc., and…

Shanti Engineering Construction Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed and assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Shanti Engineering Construction Co., V. D.C.I.T. B-214, Arjun Centre, Central Circle 5 Govandi Station Road, Govandi Air India Building, 19Th Floor, Mumbai 400 088 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aacfs 4348 H

…clusively proved that the purchases made are bogus transactions only. (vi) The case laws on which the assessee relied upon are distinct from the case of the assessee company. Reliance is placed on decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. La Medica [250 ITR 575] 4. Thus the Assessing Officer treated the purchases made from the above parties as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. 5. The matter was carried before the Ld.CIT(A) and in the course of Appellate Proceedings the assessee filed additional evidences in the form of confirmations, Income-Tax returns of the supplier’s VAT Returns etc., and…

Etesh Prakash Jain (HUF), Bhiwandi vs. ITO, WD-1(1), Kalyan

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Ito Wd 1(1), Vs. Etesh P. Jain Huf It Office, 1St Floor, Mohan M/S. Shree Darshan Pipes, Plaza, Wayale Nagar 331/5, Surya Darshan Kalyan West, Building, Kasar Ali Kalyan Gokul Nagar Bhiwandi – 421 302 Pan/Gir No. Aaahe1478G Appellant) .. Respondent) Etesh P. Jain Huf Vs. Ito Wd 1(1), It Office, 1St Floor, Mohan M/S. Shree Darshan Pipes, 331/5, Surya Darshan Plaza, Wayale Nagar Building, Kasar Ali Kalyan West, Gokul Nagar Kalyan Bhiwandi – 421 302 Pan/Gir No. Aaahe1478G Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue By Ms. Arju Garodia Assessee By Shri A.T.Jain

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM ITO WD 1(1), Vs. Etesh P. Jain HUF IT Office, 1st Floor, Mohan M/s. Shree Darshan Pipes, Plaza, Wayale Nagar 331/5, Surya Darshan Kalyan West, Building, Kasar Ali Kalyan Gokul Nagar Bhiwandi – 421 302 PAN/GIR No. AAAHE1478G Appellant) .. Respondent) Etesh P. Jain HUF Vs. ITO WD 1(1), IT Office, 1st Floor, Mohan M/s. Shree Darshan Pipes, 331/5, Surya Darshan Plaza, Wayale Nagar Building, Kasar Ali Kalyan West, Gokul Nagar Kalyan Bhiwandi – 421 302 PAN/GIR No. AAAHE1478G Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by…

ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Jostars Orogotech P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed and cross objection by the assessee stands dismissed

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘D’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya, AM & Shri Shaktijit Dey, JM ITA No.1288/Mum/2017 : Asst.Years 2009-2010 The Income Tax Officer M/s.Jostars Orogotech Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Ward 6(3)(3) A-501 Innova Marathon, Next to Gen Mumbai. Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. PAN : AABCJ3749B. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) CO No.191/Mum/2017 : Asst.Years 2009-2010 M/s.Jostars Orogotech Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ A-501 Innova Marathon, Next to Gen Ward 6(3)(3) Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg…

R.R.Chemicals & Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) I.T.A. No. 61/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 62/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 20 10-11)

…that the onus to prove the genuineness of purchases lie upon the assessee and mere production of vouchers would not prove the genuineness of purchases. The AO also placed reliance on the decision rendered by Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. La Medica (250 ITR 575), wherein it was held that the purchases claimed to have been made from non-existing concern is liable to be disallowed. The AO also placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801), wherein it was held that the issue may be considered in the light of human probabilities. Accordingly the…

Asst CIT 17(1), Mumbai vs. Golani Brothers, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 3821/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit -17(1), M/S Golani Brothers R. No. 117, 1St Floor, बिधम/ 303, Dlamal Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 29 New Marine Lines, Vs. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacfg5348R (अपीलाथी/Revenue) (प्रत्यथी / Assessee) :

…P a g e | 1 M/s Golani Brothers Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘L’ BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 3821/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) ACIT -17(1), M/s Golani Brothers R. No. 117, 1st Floor, बिधम/ 303, Dlamal Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 29 New Marine Lines, Vs. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. AACFG5348R (अपीलाथी/Revenue) (प्रत्यथी / Assessee) : अपीलाथी की ओर से/Revenue by : Shri M. V. Rajguru, D.R प्रत्यथी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri Bharat Kumar, A.R सुनवाई की तारीख/ :…

Sitaram Chemicals, Ambernath vs. DCIT Cir 2, Kalyan

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

…made from unverifiable / hawala dealer. Accordingly, the book result of the appellant is rejected u/s 145(3) of the Act. The disallowance @ 100% of unverifiable purchases from hawala dealers had been upheld in the following cases: (1) CIT vs. La Medica (2001) 250 ITR 575 (Del.) (2) Sri. Ganesh Rice Mills v. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All.) (3) Khandelwal Trading Co. v. ACIT (1996) 55 TTJ (JP) 261. (4) Swetambar Steels Ltd. v. ITO 707/1075/1262/1263/JDC2002) ITAT (Ahd). Also upheld up to Supreme Court, (5) Placed reliance in the case of Rucni Developers, ITAT 1B' Bench, . Ahmedabad in ITA Mo. 3348/Ahd/2010 - A.Y,2007…

ITO 20(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mohammedi Z. Kanchwala, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Mohammedi Z. Erstwhile Income Tax Officer, Kanchwala, Ward 15(3)(2), 11/11C, Thacker Industrial Room No.101, Matru Mandir, Estate, Grant Road (West), Old-Anjirwadi-A, Mazgaon, Mumbai – 400 007 Mumbai – 400 010 Vs. New Income Tax Officer, PAN: ABJPK1291P Ward 20(2)(2), Piramal Chambers, R.No.212, 2nd Floor, Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Shri Mohammedi Z. Ward 20(2)(2), Kanc…

Mohammedi. Z Kanchwala, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 20(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Mohammedi Z. Erstwhile Income Tax Officer, Kanchwala, Ward 15(3)(2), 11/11C, Thacker Industrial Room No.101, Matru Mandir, Estate, Grant Road (West), Old-Anjirwadi-A, Mazgaon, Mumbai – 400 007 Mumbai – 400 010 Vs. New Income Tax Officer, PAN: ABJPK1291P Ward 20(2)(2), Piramal Chambers, R.No.212, 2nd Floor, Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Shri Mohammedi Z. Ward 20(2)(2), Kanc…

ITO WD 1(5), Kalyan vs. Gopal Ramshish Tripathi, Bhiwandi

In the result, the appeal for all three years, are PARTLY

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am

…er of decisions by the various courts, where 25% to 100% disallowance of bogus purchases, have been upheld. Some of them are listed, here as under: 100% disallowance of bogus I unverifiable purchases was upheld, in following cases: (i) CIT Vs La Medica (2001) 250 ITR 575 (Del) (ii) Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All) (iii) Khandelwal Trading Co. Vs ACIT (1996) 55 TTJ (JP) 261 (iv) Swetambar Steels Ltd. vs. ITO 707 I 1075 I 1262 I 1263 I JD (2002) ITAT (Ahd) In the case of Swetambar Steels Ltd., The Hon 'ble ITAT has confirmed the disallowance of the bogus purchase in entirety stating that the pu…

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

…he addition was rightly made. It was fairly agreed by the ld. DR, that the payments were made through cheque. He relied upon the decision in the case of Shri Ganesh Rice Mills vs CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All.) and CIT vs La Medica (2001) 117 taxman 628 (Del.); 250 ITR 575 (Del.). 2.1. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Shashi Tulsyan, explained that the assessee is a civil contractor, made total purchases of 5.66 crores and the assessee disclosed 1.51 crores, which were suspected, paid taxes by including them in the return. It was explained that the net profit increased from year after year.…

DCIT 30(2), Mumbai vs. Kishore Kumar Agarwal, Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negiita Nos.870 & 871/Mum/2015 ( Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12) Dcit, 30(2), Room No.601, C-13, 6Th Floor, B.K.C. Bandra (E),Mumbai 400 020 ...... Appellant Vs. Shri Kishore Kumar Agarwal, 19/400/C-2, Seksaria Indl., Estate, S.V.Road, Malad(West) Mumbai 400 064 Pan:Aaa Pd4566E .... Respondent Co.No.132 & 133/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.870 & 871 /Mum/2015, Assessment Years - 2010-11& 2011-12)

…re effected inasmuch as the material was indeed used for the execution of contract for the local Government Authorities. In so far the plea of the Ld. Departmental Representative, based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of La Medica, 250 ITR 575(Del) is concerned, it was pointed out that the said decision is inapplicable in the facts of the present case inasmuch as in the instant case CIT(A) has made a categorical finding that there was no evidence to suggest that payments made by the assessee to the suppliers through account payee cheques had been received back in the form of cash. In s…

DCIT 30(2), Mumbai vs. Kishore Kumar Agarwal, Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negiita Nos.870 & 871/Mum/2015 ( Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12) Dcit, 30(2), Room No.601, C-13, 6Th Floor, B.K.C. Bandra (E),Mumbai 400 020 ...... Appellant Vs. Shri Kishore Kumar Agarwal, 19/400/C-2, Seksaria Indl., Estate, S.V.Road, Malad(West) Mumbai 400 064 Pan:Aaa Pd4566E .... Respondent Co.No.132 & 133/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.870 & 871 /Mum/2015, Assessment Years - 2010-11& 2011-12)

…re effected inasmuch as the material was indeed used for the execution of contract for the local Government Authorities. In so far the plea of the Ld. Departmental Representative, based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of La Medica, 250 ITR 575(Del) is concerned, it was pointed out that the said decision is inapplicable in the facts of the present case inasmuch as in the instant case CIT(A) has made a categorical finding that there was no evidence to suggest that payments made by the assessee to the suppliers through account payee cheques had been received back in the form of cash. In s…

Kiran Navin Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO -23(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Saktijit Deysmt. Kiran Navin Doshi Income Tax Officer-23(2)(4) D-705, Kalp Nagri C-10, Pratyksha Kar Bhavan Vs. B.R. Road, Mulund (W) Bkc, Bandra East Mumbai 400080 Mumbai Pan – Abwpd5848A Appellant Respondent

…at the tax has to be levied on the real person. Under these circumstances and 16 Smt. Kiran Navin Doshi keeping in view the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court as relied on by the learned Departmental representative in the case of CIT v. La Medial [2001] 250 ITR 575, we are of the view that the assessee-company has debited bogus purchases in its books of account which the assessee-company could not substantiate and, accordingly, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,37,048, which is directed to be reversed and added in the Income of the assessee-company.…

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

…he addition was rightly made. It was fairly agreed by the ld. DR, that the payments were made through cheque. He relied upon the decision in the case of Shri Ganesh Rice Mills vs CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All.) and CIT vs La Medica (2001) 117 taxman 628 (Del.); 250 ITR 575 (Del.). 2.1. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Shashi Tulsyan, explained that the assessee is a civil contractor, made total purchases of 5.66 crores and the assessee disclosed 1.51 crores, which were suspected, paid taxes by including them in the return. It was explained that the net profit increased from year after year.…