How many judgments cite CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.?

391 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (372 ITR 619), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 133(6), Section 153A, Section 69C.

CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

372 ITR 619High Court2015#189 most cited

What is CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Transactions defying human probability cannot be applied to isolated purchases if sales are accepted as genuine, and purchases cannot be disallowed without considering the entire transaction and documentary evidence. Failure to produce parties in an assessment proceeding may not be fatal to the assessee.

391

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt Ltd · 372 ITR 619 · bogus purchases · genuineness of transaction · accommodation entry · section 143(3) · section 133(6) · loose papers · section 145(3) · incriminating material · failure to produce parties

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 133(6)Section 153A Section 69C Section 153C Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 69c section 133(6)genuineness of the transaction loose papers section 145(3)accommodation entry section 133 incriminating material section 131 section 132(4)section 153c section 153

Judgments citing CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Manju Sharma, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 45(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8275/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Manju Sharma, Vs Ito, Wz-43B, Meenakshi Garden, Ward-45(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aatps2170A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Krishnan Sampath, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.09.2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-15, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Is Proprietor Of M/S Eastern Galaxy Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Export Of Handicrafts & Decorative Items. She Filed Her Return Of Income On 29.11.2014 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs.47,10,000/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under Cass With The Reason That There Is “Large Increase In Sundry Creditors With Respect To Turnover As Compared To Preceding Year.”

For Appellant: Shri Krishnan Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144ASection 68

…bunal has only affirmed the finding of the first appellate authority. Thus, there is concurrent finding of fact by the two lower appellate authorities. 19. This Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Mumbai v/s. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises(P.) Ltd., 372 ITR 619; wherein an identical fact situation arose did not interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and held that no substantial question of law arose from such order. It was held that merely because the suppliers had not appeared before the Assessing Officer, no conclusion could be arrived at that the purchases were not made by the assessee." 16.…

Diagold Designs Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assesee for AY 2011-12 is partly allowed and for AY 2014-15 are allowed

ITA 3519/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita Nos. 3519 & 3520/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2014-15) M/S. Diagold Designs Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Cc- 1(2) R-1, Cama Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Walbhat Road M.K.Road Goregaon (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400063

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…f the assessee. Hence, there is merit in the contention of the Ld. counsel. On the other hand the AO has not pointed out any cogent evidence to falsify the contention of the assessee. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 372 ITR 619 (Bom) has held that merely because the suppliers had not appeared before the Assessing Officer or the CIT (A) one could not conclude that the purchases were not made by the respondent/assessee. In the Light of the facts of the present case and the evidence on record, we are of the considered view that the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are based on t…

Vaghasiya Exports, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-32, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2370/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Vaghasiya Exports, Pr. Cit-32, C-11, Bharat Diamond Bourse, 2Nd Floor, Ae-2080, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Bandra Kurla Compex, Bandra Kurla Compex, Bandra (E), Bandra East, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaafv 2061Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Shivram, A.R. & Shri Rahul Hakani, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2018 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [Hereinafter Referred To As The Pcit Relevant To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “Order Passed U/S. 263 Is Bad-In-Law & Liable To Be Quashed 1. The Ld. Pr. Cit Erred In Issuing Notice U/S.263 Of The Act Based Upon The Proposal Received From Ito / Jt. Cit & Not By Suo-Moto Examination Of Records & Application Of Mind & Thus, The Revision Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Act Are Carried Out Upon The Directions Of Ito / Jt. Cit Is Contrary To The Provisions Of Sec. 263 Of The Act & Hence, Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivram, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Vaghasiya Exports, Pr. CIT-32, C-11, Bharat Diamond Bourse, 2nd Floor, AE-2080, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, 2nd Floor, Vs. Bandra Kurla Compex, Bandra Kurla Compex, Bandra (E), Bandra East, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 PAN: AAAFV 2061Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri K. Shivram, A.R. & Shri Rahul Hakani, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.08.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2020 O R D E R…

Riddhi Siddhi Construction, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 15(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 7196/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 142(2)Section 40

…on assessee’s appeal as regards the disallowance of alleged bogus purchases and labour expenses, learned CIT(A) referred to several case laws. He even referred to the case from Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises P. Ltd. (372 ITR 619) and noted that when sales are not doubted 100% disallowance cannot be done. Despite noting so and despite the fact that the sales in case of the assessee or the consumptions are not being doubted at all, he found the said case law not applicable. Finally he relied upon Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of M/s. Shoreline Hotel Pvt. L…

ITO 24(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Deven Ashwin Sanghvi, Mumbai

In the result, misc. application filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 2533/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 148

…e Tribunal as under :- “6. We notice that the Ld. CIT (A) has restricted the 100% addition made by the AO on account of bogus purchases in the light of the decisions of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 372 ITR 619 (Bom), decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd., Bholanath Polyfab, Simit P. Sheth, Sanket Steel Traders, Satyanarayan P. Rathi etc. in which the additions were restricted to 25 to 12.5%. In the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (supra), the Hon’ble High Court has held that merely because the supplier had not a…

Income Tax Officer-4(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Manek Metal (I) Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 4264/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.4264/M/2017 & 4265/M/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) Ito-4(2)(4) बिधम/ M/S. Manek Metal (I) P. Ltd. Room No.647, 6Th Floor, 262, K-1, Inside Mehta Vs. Estate, Thakur Dhwar, Main Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 2Nd Khattar Gali-2 Road, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcm8872A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Drop Singh Meena (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Prateek Jain सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 31/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 07.03.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita. No.4264/M/2017:- 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 07.03.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JainFor Respondent: Shri Drop Singh Meena (Sr. AR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 37(1)

…ing for the year under consideration in respect of the said eight parties. The same cannot be said to be peak balance arising out of cash circulation. 6.3.7.1) in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Mumbai v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd CIT [2015)(372 ITR 619)(Bombay) the court has held as under:- "We have considered the submission on behalf of the revenue. However, from the order of the Tribunal dated 30-04-2010, we find that the Tribunal has deleted the additions on account of bogus purchases net only on the basis of stock statement i.e. reconciliation statement, but also in view of the other frets.…

ITO 21(2)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Print Magic, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 1933/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Ito 21(2)(5), M/S Print Magic, Income Tax Office, 13, Sahavas, Opp. Kashinath Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, Dhuru Road, Near Kirti College, Room No. 107, Lalbaug, Parel, Vs. Mumbai - 400028 Mumbai - 400012 Pan: Aagfp4991D (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri V. Vinodkumar (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Satish Mody (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 16/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/06/2020

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody (AR)For Respondent: Shri V. Vinodkumar (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…ht to have confirmed the addition made by the AO. 3 Assessment Year: 2011-12 6. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, CIT Vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 372 ITR 619 (Bom) that merely because the suppliers had not appeared before the Assessing Officer one could not conclude that the purchases were not made by the assessee. The Ld. counsel further pointed out that the payments were made through banking channels. Moreover, the assessee has furnished PAN Card in respect of Aryan Printers, proof of tax deducted a…

DCIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. D R Coats Ink and Resins P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2143/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Dr Coats Ink & Resins Pvt. Tax-12(2)(1), Room No. 223, Ltd., 230 New Sonal Link Vs. 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Industrial Building No. 2, Estate M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Link Road, Malald West, Mumbai-400064. Pan No. Aabcd8645A

For Appellant: Mr. M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…stock statement. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel for the submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) be affirmed. Further reliance is placed by him on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 619; Pr. CIT v. M/s Mohommad Haji Adam & Co. (ITA No. 1004 of 2006) and the order of the Tribunal in Shri Ramesh Kumar Daulatraj Mehta v. ITO (ITA No. 4192/Mum/2018). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. We agree with the reasons given by the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of purchases from Ankush Mercantile Pvt…

Parsons Overseas, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 21 (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6705/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Kumari Padmapani Bora

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…e purchases as non-genuine on the ground that notices were either returned or there was no reply from the parties. Ld. Counsel for the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [372 ITR 619] submits that when the assessee has furnished confirmations letters, copies of invoices, bank statements etc., non-appearance of suppliers before the Assessing Officer is not a ground to held purchases as bogus. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and peruse…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(3), Mumbai vs. Vijay N. Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5216/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Vikas Awasthy & Shri G. Manjunathaacit-17(3) Vs. Vijay N.Mehta Room No.137, 1St Floor Room No.13,338 Aaykar Bhawan,M.K.Marg N.N.Street Mumbai-400 020 Masjid Bunder(W) Mumbai-400 009 Pan/Gir No.Aadpm8512G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…ring relevant submission of the assessee and also, on analysis of information collected during the course of appellate proceedings and also by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Lrd (2015) 372 ITR 619, scaled down addition to 4.27% % profit on alleged bogus purchases on the basis of gross profit declared by the assessee for earlier year. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) are as under:- 5.1 In the case of Totaram Sharma [ lTO vs Totaram Sharma (Tax Appeal No 1344 of 2008 order dated 9.2.2010),GUJRAT HC.]the Hon'ble High Court has noted [i…

Chitralekha, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.- 17(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment years 2009-10

ITA 5220/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 & Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Chitralekha, The Asst. Commissioner Of 25, Andheri Industrial Estate, Income Tax-17(1), Veera Desai Road, Andheri (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400053 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaafc1152B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Vissanji (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2019

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji (AR)For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…onsible for not producing the parties before the concerned authority. In the present case the assesse has furnished the details including name and address of parties their PAN No., date of bill etc. Further, in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Ltd. 372 ITR 619 (Bom), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court had held that merely because the suppliers have not appeared before the concerned authority, one cannot conclude that purchases were not made by the assesse. Moreover, there is no evidence on record to establish that the AO has conducted independent enquiry to ascertain as to whether the machinery in question…

ACIT- 27 (3), Mumbai vs. Virtex Engineers, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5692/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiacit-27(3) Vs. Virtex Engineers Room No.423, 4Th Floor 3A, Ashirwad Building, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Govandi Road, Chembur Station Complex, Vashi Mumbai-400 071 Navi Mumbai-400 703 Pan/Gir No.Aaafv1343D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…or from the grey market without hills. Thus, there ought to be some purchases made and hence, entire disallowance is not justified. In this regard, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd.. 372 ITR 619 (Bombay), is quite relevant wherein Hon'ble High Court has held that - "When the assessee have filed letter of confirmations of the suppliers, Bank statements highlighting the payment entries through account paves cheque, copies of invoices, stock reconciliation statements before the AO; and merely because the suppliers did not appear before the…

Ralf Jems P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1578/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

…monds under consideration and export of the same which are recorded in the Books of Accounts prove the genuineness and the veracity of the purchase transactions. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - (i) CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., [372 ITR 619] (ii) ITO v. Karsan Nandu [77 taxmann.com 275 (Mum)] (iii) M/s. Vama International v. ITO in ITA.No. 7315, 7316 & 7317/Mum/2016 dated 15.02.2018. (iv) M/s. Sejal Exports (India) v. DCIT in ITA.No. 3854 to 3859 & 3864/Mum/2017 dated 04.07.2018. (v) M/s. Simoni Gems v. DCIT in ITA.No. 747 to 752/Mum/2018 dated 13.03.2019. (vi) Indo Unique Trading P…

Ralf Jems P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1577/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

Ralf Jems P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1576/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

Ralf Jems P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1575/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

ACIT Cen. Cir. - 25, Mumbai vs. M/S. Parle Products P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result this ground No

ITA 6964/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma () & Shri Pawan Singh () - Ay 1998-99 - Ay 2002-03 Ita No. 3891/Mum/2007 - Ay 2003-04 - Ay 2009-10 - Ay 2008-09 - Ay 2007-08 - Ay 2006-07 - Ay 2010-11

Section 14ASection 41(1)

…inward register number, ledger account, payment of invoices by cheque, etc. The Ld. AR further submits that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of jurisdiction High Court in the case of CIT Vs Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P) Ltd (2015) 372 ITR 619 (Bom), wherein it has been held that since sale supported the purchases made by the assessee and the payments were also made through banks, 19 the purchase could not be rejected as bogus merely because the suppliers had not appeared before the assessing officer. Also that, Special Leave Petition filed by the department against the judgement…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Na

In the result, all three C

ITA 350/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram S. Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…ITA 347,349,350/SRT/2018 CO 9 to 11/SRT/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH SURAT BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM S. YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year: 2011-12 Assessment year: 2010-11 Assessment year: 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s Rushabh International, Navsari Circle, 306, Ruby Complex, Navsari. Shantadevi Road, vs Navsari. (PAN: AAFFR7499R) Appellant Respondent C.O.No. 09/SRT/2018 (IN ITA No. 347/SRT/2018) Assessment year: 2011-12 C.O.No. 10/SRT/2018 (IN ITA No. 349/SRT/2018) Assessment year: 2010-11 C.O.No. 11/SRT/2018 (IN ITA N…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Na vs. Ari Circle, Surat

In the result, all three C

ITA 349/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram S. Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Na vs. Ari Circle, Navsari

In the result, all three C

ITA 347/SRT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram S. Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148