CIT v. Simit P. Seth

Dev Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 1439, 1440, 1441 & 1442/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15) M/s. Dev Diamonds v. ACIT, Ward 31(1) BC-4022B, Bharat Diamonds Bourse C-13, Bandra (E) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 PAN: AACFD2753R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rahul Khanderiya Department by : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria Date of Hearing : 26.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.08.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeal…

Dev Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 1439, 1440, 1441 & 1442/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15) M/s. Dev Diamonds v. ACIT, Ward 31(1) BC-4022B, Bharat Diamonds Bourse C-13, Bandra (E) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 PAN: AACFD2753R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rahul Khanderiya Department by : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria Date of Hearing : 26.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.08.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeal…

Dev Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 1439, 1440, 1441 & 1442/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15) M/s. Dev Diamonds v. ACIT, Ward 31(1) BC-4022B, Bharat Diamonds Bourse C-13, Bandra (E) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 PAN: AACFD2753R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rahul Khanderiya Department by : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria Date of Hearing : 26.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.08.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeal…

Dev Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 1439, 1440, 1441 & 1442/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15) M/s. Dev Diamonds v. ACIT, Ward 31(1) BC-4022B, Bharat Diamonds Bourse C-13, Bandra (E) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 PAN: AACFD2753R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rahul Khanderiya Department by : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria Date of Hearing : 26.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.08.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeal…

Smaru Gems, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhsmaru Gems Ito - 19(3)(3) Fw 6070, Bharat Diamond 219, Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Bourse, Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400007. Bandra East, Mumbai-400004. Pan: Abgfs6292P Appellant Respondent

…les which is not permissible unless it is specifically authorise to do so in the particular provision contained in the Act. The ld. CIT(A) by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Hariram Bhambhani (ITA No. 313 of 2013) and Simit P. Sheth (38 Taxmann.com 385) held that not the entire purchase price but only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. The department has considered 6% of profit margin in case of Gems & Jewellery is reasonable for an assessee which is not invalid in hawala purchases. The ld. CIT(A) concluded that it would be appropr…

Mafatlal H. Bothra, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “SMC” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 4388/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Mafatlal H. Bothra The Income Tax Officer, C/o D.C. Bothra & Co. LLP Ward 19(2)(3), Matru (CA) (formerly known as D.C. Mandir 2nd Floor, Tardeo Bothra * Co.) 297, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 Vs. 1 st Road, Wille Mansion, Floor, Opp Bank of India, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400 007 (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा सं./…

Sea Linkers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2297/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ M/S. Sea Linkers Private Acit 8(1)(2), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Bpt, Plot No. 107, M.K Road V. Quay Street, Darukhana, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aahcs5084N (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Deepak Tralshawala Revenue By: Shri. Manish Kumar Singh,Dr

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “J” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2297/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ M/s. Sea Linkers Private ACIT 8(1)(2), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, BPT, Plot no. 107, M.K Road v. Quay Street, Darukhana, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN: AAHCS5084N (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Shri. Deepak Tralshawala Revenue by: Shri. Manish Kumar Singh,DR सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing : 02.05.2019…

ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mukesh C. Sanghvi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri G Manjunatha () Ito-19(2)(3), Mumbai Vs Shri Mukesh C Sanghvi Prop M/S Rajendra Steel & Alloys Room No.6, Ground Floor, 79, 2Nd Pathan Street, 5Th Kumbharwada Mumbai 400 004 Pan : Anzps6511Q Appellant Respondednt

…not warrant interference. Even otherwise, whether the estimate should be at a . particular sum or at a different sum, can never be an issue of law. 8.12 Similarly, in yet another decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 Taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Hon'ble Court was seized with a similar issue where the AO had found that some of the alleged suppliers of steel to the assessee had not supplied any goods but had only provided sale bills and hence, purchases from the said parties were heid to be bogus. The AO, in that case ,added the entire amount of purchases to gross profit of t…

Rajshri Productions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Rajshri Productions Pvt. Ltd., The Asstt. Commissioner Of Bhavana 1St Floor, 442, Income Tax -16(1), Veer Savarkar Road, Prabhadevi, Room No. 439, Aayakar Mumbai - 400025 Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pan: Aaacr4139G Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Rajshri Productions Pvt. Ltd., The Asstt. Commissioner of Bhavana 1st Floor, 442, Income Tax -16(1), Veer Savarkar Road, Prabhadevi, Room No. 439, Aayakar Mumbai - 400025 Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, PAN: AAACR4139G Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ajay Shekhari & Assessee by : Dilkhush Malesha (ARs) Revenue by : Shri D.G. Pansari (DR) Date of Hearing: 21/02/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 17/05/2019 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed…

Asst CIT 25(3), Mumbai vs. Radiant Gems, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and cross objection filed by the

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha, Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit-25(3), M/S Radiant Gems, Room No.601, C-10, 6Th 701C, Gokul Divine, S.V. Road, बनाम/ Floor, Pratyakshakar Datta Wadi, Vile Parle West, Vs. Mumbai-400056 Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aajfr3662E Co No.153/Mum/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4146/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Radiant Gems, Acit-25(3), 701C, Gokul Divine, S.V. Room No.601, C-10, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ Road, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra Vs. Datta Wadi, Vile Parle West, Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400056 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aajfr3662E

…ot warrant intemfrrence. Even, otherwise, whether the estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different swn, can never he an issue of law.” 5.11 Similarly, in yet another decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 Taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Hon'ble Court was seized with a similar issue where the A.O. had found that some of the alleged suppliers of steel to the assessee had not supplied any goods but had only provided sale bills and hence, purchases from the said parties were held to be bogus. The A.O. in that case added the entire amount of purchases to gross profit of…

Income Tax Officer-19(3)(5), Mumbai vs. Umeshbhai R. Patel, Prop: M/S.Uma Gems, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 19(3)(5) V. Shri Umeshbhai R. Patel Room No. 201 Prop: M/S. Uma Gems Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, 117/A, Pancharatna, Mumbai – 400 007 Opera House Mumbai – 400 004 Pan: Acfpp 2969 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Rajeev K. Gubgotra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Income Tax Officer – 19(3)(5) v. Shri Umeshbhai R. Patel Room No. 201 Prop: M/s. Uma Gems Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, 117/A, Pancharatna, Mumbai – 400 007 Opera House Mumbai – 400 004 PAN: ACFPP 2969 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Rajeev K. Gubgotra Date of Hearing : 27.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 26.04.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learne…

Mitesh Ilesh Gadhia, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Ravish Soodshri Mitesh Ilesh Gadhia Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) 201, Vyapar Bhavan, 2Nd Floor Room No. 1918 368/270 Narshi Natha Street Vs. Air India Building Masjid Bunder (W) Nariman Point Mumbai 400009 Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aegpg2818A Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member Shri Mitesh Ilesh Gadhia DCIT, Central Circle-4(2) 201, Vyapar Bhavan, 2nd Floor Room No. 1918 368/270 Narshi Natha Street Vs. Air India Building Masjid Bunder (W) Nariman Point Mumbai 400009 Mumbai 400021 PAN – AEGPG2818A Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Mayur Kisnadwala Respondent by: Shri Narendra Jang Pangi Date of Hearing: 07.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 12.04.2019 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran, AM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3, Mumbai vs. Unitop Aquacare, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P. Meena, Hon'Blea.C.I.T Circle – 3 V. M/S. Unitop Aquacare Room No.2, 6Th Floor, 501, 5Th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, Ashar I.T. Park, M.I.D.C, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Wagle Industrial Estate, Mic, Wagle Estate, Thane, Mumbai – 400 604 Thane (W) – 400 604 Pan: Aabfu 6592 L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Unitop Aquacare D.C.I.T Circle – 3 V. 501, 5Th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Road No. 16-Z Mic, Wagle Estate, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (W) - 400604 Thane, Mumbai – 400 604 Pan: Aabfu 6592 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain Department By : Shri Rajiv Gubgotra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.C.I.T Circle – 3 v. M/s. Unitop Aquacare Room No.2, 6th Floor, 501, 5th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, Ashar I.T. Park, M.I.D.C, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Wagle Industrial Estate, MIC, Wagle Estate, Thane, Mumbai – 400 604 Thane (W) – 400 604 PAN: AABFU 6592 L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Unitop Aquacare D.C.I.T Circle – 3 v. 501, 5th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, 6th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Road No. 16-Z MIC, Wagle Estate, Wagle Industrial E…

Unitop Aquacare, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P. Meena, Hon'Blea.C.I.T Circle – 3 V. M/S. Unitop Aquacare Room No.2, 6Th Floor, 501, 5Th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, Ashar I.T. Park, M.I.D.C, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Wagle Industrial Estate, Mic, Wagle Estate, Thane, Mumbai – 400 604 Thane (W) – 400 604 Pan: Aabfu 6592 L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Unitop Aquacare D.C.I.T Circle – 3 V. 501, 5Th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Road No. 16-Z Mic, Wagle Estate, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (W) - 400604 Thane, Mumbai – 400 604 Pan: Aabfu 6592 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain Department By : Shri Rajiv Gubgotra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.C.I.T Circle – 3 v. M/s. Unitop Aquacare Room No.2, 6th Floor, 501, 5th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, Ashar I.T. Park, M.I.D.C, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Wagle Industrial Estate, MIC, Wagle Estate, Thane, Mumbai – 400 604 Thane (W) – 400 604 PAN: AABFU 6592 L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Unitop Aquacare D.C.I.T Circle – 3 v. 501, 5th Floor, Dosti Pinnacle, 6th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Plot No. E/7, Road No. 22, Road No. 16-Z MIC, Wagle Estate, Wagle Industrial E…

Sun Jewels Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Eleganza Jewellery Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT - 11(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Sun Jewels Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit Circle-11(2)(2), (Formerly Known As M/S Vs. Room No. 421, 4Th Floor, Eleganza Jewellery Pvt. Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Unit No. 102-103, Sdf-Iv, Road, Mumbai-400020. Seepz, Sez, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400096. Pan No. Aabce3519L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Cit Circle-11(2)(2), M/S Sun Jewels Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 421, 4Th Floor, Vs. (Formerly Known As M/S Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Eleganza Jewellery Pvt. Mumbai-400020. Ltd.) Unit No. 102-103, Sdf-Iv, Seepz, Sez, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400096. Pan No. Aabce3519L Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Sun Jewels Pvt. Ltd. Dy. CIT Circle-11(2)(2), (Formerly known as M/s Vs. Room No. 421, 4th floor, Eleganza Jewellery Pvt. Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Unit No. 102-103, SDF-IV, Road, Mumbai-400020. SEEPZ, SEZ, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400096. PAN No. AABCE3519L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. CIT Circle-11(2)(2), M/s Sun Je…

Asst CIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Chhaya Gems, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…entire amount of purchases, it is right to find out what is the additional benefit by resorting to such bogus purchases, which the appellant would have made from such unknown entities. 7.10 Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 Taxmann.com 385 (Guj), was seized with a similar issue where the AO had found that some of the alleged suppliers of steel to the assessee had not supplied any goods but had only provided sale bills and hence, purchases from the said parties were held to be bogus. The AO in that case added the entire amount of purchases to gross profit of the ITA. No. 2552…

Mody Interiors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 16(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2009-10

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Mody Interiors Pvt. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward – 16(3)(1), 201, lVishaka Arcade, Room No.439, Off Veera Desai Road, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near MVM School, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 053 PAN: AAECM 7620H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Abhishek Jhunjhunwala, A.R. Revenue by : Shri D.G. Pansari, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accoun…

Deputy Cosioner of Icome Tax 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Abhishek Millennium Contracts Private Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7197/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

…fab Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the estimated suppressed profit margin embedded in such amounts of purchases could only be disallowed and subjected to tax. 6.29 Similarly, in yet another decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 Taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Hon'ble Court was seized with a similar issue where the A.O. had found that some of the alleged suppliers of steel to the assessee had not supplied any goods but had only provided sale bills and hence, purchases from the said parties were held to be bogus. The A.O. in that case added the entire amount of purchases to gross profit of…