CIT v. Satyanarayan P. Rathi

351 ITR 150High Court2013#3277 most cited
36

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 44afsection 262trade creditorsthird party informationinadequate enquiryrevision u/s 263non application of mindsection 263(1)lack of enquirysection 40a(3)malabar industriallive link

Judgments citing CIT v. Satyanarayan P. Rathi

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S.Shoreline Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 2094/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Shoreline Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle- 1(2), Prop. M/S Marine Plaza, Dur-Ul- R. No. 906, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Habib, 29, Marine Drive, Bldg., Annex Bldg., M.K. Road, Vs. Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aabcs1380B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s Shoreline Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle- 1(2), Prop. M/s Marine Plaza, Dur-ul- R. No. 906, 9th Floor, Old CGO habib, 29, Marine Drive, Bldg., Annex Bldg., M.K. Road, Vs. Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AABCS1380B (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No. 97/MUM/2019 (Arising out of ITA No. 2094/Mum/2018) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s Shoreline Hotels Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. CIT, Central Circle- 1(2), Prop. M/s Marine Plaza, D…

Vps Silk Fabrics Pvt Ld, Elampillai vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Salem

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed

ITA 626/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.626/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Vps Silk Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Acit, No.2/41-3, Water Tank Street, Circle – 2, Perumagoundampatty, Elampillai, 3, Gandhi Road, Salem-636 502 Salem – 636 007 Pan: Aaccv4869K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 69C

…ver before the AO, with a view to avoid litigation, the assessee agreed to the addition of an estimated profit element embedded in the impugned transaction to returned income relying on the decisions of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court report in 356 ITR 451 and 351 ITR 150. However, neither the AO nor the CIT(A) appreciated the facts and circumstances properly and hence the ld.AR pleaded to delete the addition u/s.69C of the Act. 4. Per contra, the Ld.DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We heard the rival contentions and gone through the relevant material. Though the assessee has place…

Aggarwal Associates (Promoters) Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result the ground No

ITA 787/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumaraggarwal Associates Vs Dcit, Central Circle, (Promoters) Ltd., Ghaziabad 10, New Rajdhani Enclave, Vikas Marg, Delhi- 92 (Pan: Aaaca2789D)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

…lowed by this court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of ITO vs. Kishor Amrutlal PateL In the result, tax appeal is dismissed. 4.7 Also the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Sathyanarayan P. Rathi 351 ITR 150 has held as under: “4. We are of the opinion that the revenue ought to have preferred two appeals if the revenue was aggrieved by the Tribunal's verdict of not only rejecting its appeal but of allowing assessee. However, when we are not inclined to interfere with the Tribunal's order on merits, we do not insist on the revenue's filing a sepa…

M/S. Mansarovar Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Tehri Garhwal vs. ACIT, Haridwar

In the result the ground No

ITA 7022/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Mansarovar Infratech Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Income Tax, Garhwal Mandal Sales Pvt. Circle Haridwar Ltd.), Dhalwala, Tehsil Narendera Nagar, Tehri Garhwal Pan :Aaacg5220B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Respondent By Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr.Dr

Section 147Section 234B

…llowed by this court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. KishorAmrutlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed.” 4.7 Also the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Sathyanarayan P. Rathi 351 ITR 150 has held as under: “4. We are of the opinion that the revenue ought to have preferred two appeals if the revenue was aggrieved by the Tribunal's verdict of not only rejecting its appeal but of allowing assessee. However, when we are not inclined to interfere with the Tribunal's order on merits, we do not insist on the revenue's filing a separate…

The Dy. CIT, (OSD)-I, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Kintech Synergy Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 2378/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Apr 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)

…no inflation in purchases. It would, therefore, be proper to tax a reasonable percentage of total purchases made for which the bills have been found to be bogus. The view finds supports from the following judgements: - i. CIT v Sathyanarayan P. Rathi (2013) 351 ITR 150 (Guj.) :- Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Assessment - Additions to income [Purchases from market] - Assessment year 2003-04 - Assessing Officer made addition of entire amount of purchase on ground that concerned suppliers had never supplied goods as named by assessee - Commissioner (Appeals) as well as Tribunal ITA Nos.2377 & 2378/Ah…

The Dy. CIT, (OSD)-I, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Kintech Synergy Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 2377/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Apr 2019AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)

…no inflation in purchases. It would, therefore, be proper to tax a reasonable percentage of total purchases made for which the bills have been found to be bogus. The view finds supports from the following judgements: - i. CIT v Sathyanarayan P. Rathi (2013) 351 ITR 150 (Guj.) :- Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Assessment - Additions to income [Purchases from market] - Assessment year 2003-04 - Assessing Officer made addition of entire amount of purchase on ground that concerned suppliers had never supplied goods as named by assessee - Commissioner (Appeals) as well as Tribunal ITA Nos.2377 & 2378/Ah…

Shri Pravin Shivlal Shah, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3), Baroda

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1379/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.L. Meena, Sr. D.R
Section 69

…ould have been taken by doing this is to inflate the purchase cost and show reduced margin. (13) Considering the jurisdictional court precedents, there is a recent decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sathyanarayan N. Rathi (2013) 351 ITR 150 (Guj.). In this case, in similar circumstances, the Ld AO had originally added the entire purchases from such parties which were found to be bogus. On appeal, the Ld CIT (A), observed that there is complete quantitative tally of the material purchased hence it was clear that such materials were purchased from the open market and bills were procur…

DCIT 28(3), Navi Mumbai vs. Sunil Khanna, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal and the assessee’s cross objection stands dismissed

ITA 276/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 276/Mum/2015 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dy. Cit-28(3), Sunil H. Khanna, बिाम/ 3Rd Floor Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway 311, A-Wing, Arneja Corner, Station Complex, Vashi, Sector-17, Vashi, Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 703 Navi Mumbai-400 703 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afhpk 2599 E (Revenue) : (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri v. Justin
Section 143(1)

…August 16, 2021, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2020 in the case of CIT v. Kishor Amrutlal Patel In the result, tax appeal is dismissed." 2.23 Similar view have been expressed by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs Sathyanarayan P. Rathi (2013) 351 ITR 150 (Guj.). 2.24 The above decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat and the ITAT, Ahmedabad are squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case. What can be disallowed in the case of the alleged bogus purchases, as decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat and the ITAT, Ahmadabad in the above cited case, is that only the profit element e…

Manish Kanji Patel, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result Departmental appeal ground No

ITA 7627/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

For Appellant: Shri MC Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA NOS. 7299/Mum/2014, 7154/Mum/2012 & 7300/Mum/2014 A.Ys 2008-09 to 2010-11 ITO 4(1)(4) Manish Kanji Patel 6th Floor, R.No. 637 A Aayakar 10 DR Dimash, Nagindas, N Vs. Bhavan, Shahlan, OFF JSS RD, Kalbadevi Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400002 PAN No. AAAPP9055C (Appellant) : (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7627/Mum/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Manish Kanji Patel ITO 4(1)(4) R.NO. 22, 2nd Floor, 52-A, Mani 6th Floor, R.No. 637 A Aayakar Vs. Mahal, C.P. Tank RD, Bhavan, Mumbai-400004 Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AAAPP9055C : (A…

ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Manish Kanji Patel, Mumbai

In the result Departmental appeal ground No

ITA 7300/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

For Appellant: Shri MC Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA NOS. 7299/Mum/2014, 7154/Mum/2012 & 7300/Mum/2014 A.Ys 2008-09 to 2010-11 ITO 4(1)(4) Manish Kanji Patel 6th Floor, R.No. 637 A Aayakar 10 DR Dimash, Nagindas, N Vs. Bhavan, Shahlan, OFF JSS RD, Kalbadevi Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400002 PAN No. AAAPP9055C (Appellant) : (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7627/Mum/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Manish Kanji Patel ITO 4(1)(4) R.NO. 22, 2nd Floor, 52-A, Mani 6th Floor, R.No. 637 A Aayakar Vs. Mahal, C.P. Tank RD, Bhavan, Mumbai-400004 Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AAAPP9055C : (A…

ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Manish Kanji Patel, Mumbai

In the result Departmental appeal ground No

ITA 7299/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

For Appellant: Shri MC Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA NOS. 7299/Mum/2014, 7154/Mum/2012 & 7300/Mum/2014 A.Ys 2008-09 to 2010-11 ITO 4(1)(4) Manish Kanji Patel 6th Floor, R.No. 637 A Aayakar 10 DR Dimash, Nagindas, N Vs. Bhavan, Shahlan, OFF JSS RD, Kalbadevi Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400002 PAN No. AAAPP9055C (Appellant) : (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 7627/Mum/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Manish Kanji Patel ITO 4(1)(4) R.NO. 22, 2nd Floor, 52-A, Mani 6th Floor, R.No. 637 A Aayakar Vs. Mahal, C.P. Tank RD, Bhavan, Mumbai-400004 Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AAAPP9055C : (A…

DCIT 13(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Nihar Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3790/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ( Account Member)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 234B

…During the course of hearing before us, Ld.Counsel of the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions ITA No.313 of 2013 Bombay High Court – CIT vs Shri Hariram Bhambhani CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab P Ltd 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs Sathyanarayan P Rathi 351 ITR 150 (Guj) ITO vs Shri Gopikishan C Mundhara ITA 2993/Mum/2013 DCIT vs Remi Process Plant & Machinery Ltd ITA 1723/Mum/2015 Subsequently, during the course of hearing both the parties present, fairly agreed that the order of Ld.CIT(A) can be sustained as it is meaning thereby that the relief granted by Ld.CIT(A) as well as the disallowance sustained b…

Nihaar Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 13(1)(1)

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3020/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ( Account Member)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 234B

…During the course of hearing before us, Ld.Counsel of the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions ITA No.313 of 2013 Bombay High Court – CIT vs Shri Hariram Bhambhani CIT vs Bholanath Poly Fab P Ltd 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs Sathyanarayan P Rathi 351 ITR 150 (Guj) ITO vs Shri Gopikishan C Mundhara ITA 2993/Mum/2013 DCIT vs Remi Process Plant & Machinery Ltd ITA 1723/Mum/2015 Subsequently, during the course of hearing both the parties present, fairly agreed that the order of Ld.CIT(A) can be sustained as it is meaning thereby that the relief granted by Ld.CIT(A) as well as the disallowance sustained b…

Prabhav Construction Co., Mumbai vs. ITO 26(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4405/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu: (A.Y : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Ms. Beena Santosh
Section 143(3)Section 44A

…entative pointed out that the entire purchases could not be treated as income and only the profit element on such transactions be treated as income assessable following the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sathyanarayan P. Rathi, 351 ITR 150. 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR has reiterated the stand of lower authorities and contended that the additions were made not only on the basis of information obtained from Sales Tax Department, but also 6 Prabhav Construction Co. as a result of investigations carried out by issuance of notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. 9. I have carefully conside…

DCIT Cir 29(3), Mumbai vs. Sharad V. Shah, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 746/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh: (A.Y : 2006-07)

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram & Sheetal JadhavFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Kardam
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

…IT(A), it would be fair if the disallowance for alleged bogus purchases is restricted to 10% of the alleged bogus purchases. The CIT(A) has justified his decision by relying on the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sathyanarayan P. Rathi, 351 ITR 150 and in the case of CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd., ITA No. 63 of 2012 dated 23.10.2012 holding that the entire amount covered by unproved purchases could not be taxed, but only the profit embedded therein could be subject to tax. As a consequence, CIT(A) has retained the addition to the extent of Rs.15,05,631/- and deleted the balance. Again…

ITO 29(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Hiren Shantilal Doshi, Mumbai

ITA 715/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 133Section 254(1)Section 69C

…in such cases profit element amended in the transaction could be upheld. He referred to the cases of Simit P Seth (ITA/ 553 of 2012) of the Hon,ble Gujarat High Court and Bholenath Poly Fab (P.) Ltd (ITA/63 of 2012, dated 23/10/2012) and Sathyanarayan P Rathi(351 ITR 150)and reiterated that only the profit element embedded in such purchases shown could be added to the income of the assessee.Finally,he held that it would be fair and reasonable if the disallowance,out of the alleged bogus purchases to cover up inflation namely case in the case of the assessee,was restricted to 10%. He directed the AO to disallow th…