CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Asst CIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Itd Cementation India Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5313/Mum/2015 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit – 14(2)(1) M/S Itd Cementation India Ltd. Room No. 474, 4Th Floor बिाम/ National Plastic Building, A-Subhash Road, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Paranjape B Scheme, Vile Parle(E), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 057 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaact-1426-A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra-Ld. Sr.Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 06/09/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 06/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): -

…assessee failed to substantiate the claim of purchase with evidence. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in applying the ration of the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs Simit P.Seth,356 ITR 451(Guj) and hereby Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate its case with evidences. As evident the revenue is aggrieved by deletion of certain disallowance u/r 8D(2)(ii) as well as by relief provided by Ld. CIT(A) on account of alleged bogus purchases. 3. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal…

ITO 23(1)(6), Mumbai vs. Anish Kantilal Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 994/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito – 23(1)(6) Anish Kantilal Jain R. No. 203, 2Nd Floor Nimesh Medical Corporation, बिाम Earnest House, Nariman Point, R.No.7, Bangle House, 2/22, / Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Babu Genu Road, Mumbai-400 002 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaapj-6238-M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Ms. Smita Varma– Ld. Sr. Dr Assessee By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/09/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 02/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Ay 2009-10 Arises Out Of The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29 Mumbai [Cit(A)] Dated 25/11/2019 In The Matter Of Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 On 23/03/2015. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Granted Partial Relief To The Assessee On Account Of Alleged Bogus Purchases Against Which The Revenue Is In Further Appeal Before Us.

…C. 4. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering assessee’s submissions, concurred that sales turnover was not under doubt and therefore, the peak additions were not justified. Finally, relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT V/s Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), the estimation was made @12.5% against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. 5. After going through impugned order, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has clinched the issue in the right perspective. The sale was not under doubt and there could be no sale without actual purchase of material keeping in view the fact that the assessee was engage…

M/S Roshan Metal Industries, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1005/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Roshan Metal Industries Ito-16(3)(4), 2Nd Floor, 2/4, Pushpa Sadan Matru Mandir,Tardeo Road, बिाम/ Vs. 2Nd Carpenter Street, Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 004 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aajfr-3446-A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Smita Varma– Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/09/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 02/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Ay 2009-10 Arises Out Of The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7 Mumbai [Cit(A)] Dated 23/12/2018 In The Matter Of Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 On 12/08/2014. The Sole Subject Matter Of Appeal Is Estimation Of Addition On Account Of Alleged Bogus Purchases. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. However, The Material On Record Was Sufficient For Disposal Of The Appeal. The Ld. Dr

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “एक-सदस्यमामला” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय श्री छल्ला नागेन्द्र प्रसाद, न्याययक सदस्य एवुं माननीय श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल ,लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1005/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Roshan Metal Industries ITO-16(3)(4), 2nd floor, 2/4, Pushpa Sadan Matru Mandir,Tardeo Road, बिाम/ Vs. 2nd Carpenter Street, Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 004 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ PAN/G…

Lavina Gwalani, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 22 (2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…of the matter elaborately with reference to the submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following various judicial pronouncements along with the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451] restricted the addition to 12.5% of purchases. While holding so, the Ld.CIT(A) observed as under: - “ 5.5. Conclusion on case laws: The net conclusion that can be arrived at from the above discussion is that where the sales and purchases are verifiable and proven e.g. to or from government bodies or agencies etc no addition may be made. If howev…

Lavina Gwalani, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 22 (2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…of the matter elaborately with reference to the submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following various judicial pronouncements along with the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451] restricted the addition to 12.5% of purchases. While holding so, the Ld.CIT(A) observed as under: - “ 5.5. Conclusion on case laws: The net conclusion that can be arrived at from the above discussion is that where the sales and purchases are verifiable and proven e.g. to or from government bodies or agencies etc no addition may be made. If howev…

Jalpesh Vinay Kumar Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 23 (2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed whereas the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1.आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.174/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2.आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.172/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3.आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.173/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Jalpesh Vinay Kumar Shah Ito – 23(2)(3), 124, 1St Floor 1401, Sugee Heights बिाम/ Dwarkesh Nagar Chs Ltd. Matru Mandir Vs. Nahur Road, Mulund (West) Tardev Road Mumbai-400 080 Mumbai-400 007 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaops-0207-M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 4.आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No. 6564/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5.आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No. 6565/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6.आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No. 6566/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito Ward – 26(1)(7), Jalpesh Vinay Kumar Shah Room No. 329, 3Rd Floor 1401, Sugee Heights बिाम/ Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block, Dwarkesh Nagar Chs Ltd. Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex (East) Nahur Road, Mulund (West) Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 080 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaops-0207-M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

…assessee purchased goods from grey market and procured bills from these 4 Shri Jalpesh Vinay Kumar Shah Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12 suppliers to suppress the profits. Relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT V/s Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), the estimation was made @12.5%. The said adjudication has given rise to cross-appeals before us. 6. Going by the factual matrix, we concur with the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) that sales turnover was not under doubt and there could be no sales without actual purchase of material keeping in view the fact that the assessee was engaged in trading a…

ITO 28 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Sanjay Kashiram Goyal, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito-28(3)(1), Shri Sanjay Kashiram Goyal, Tower No. 6, 3Rd Floor, Vashi Rly Vs. Flat-C, 114, Coral Crest, Sector- Station Complex, Vashi 23, Nerul, Navi Mumbai-400 706. Navi Mumbai-400 706 Pan No. Ahfpg 9521 J Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Vijay Kumar Menon, Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 03/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/08/2021

…disclosed parties in the grey market a lower rates and purchases were known as being made from the impugned parties to suppress its profits. In such a situation, the various Courts including the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 have held that not the entire purchases but only the profit element embedded in these purchases was to be disallowed. The Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in This case has held that profit margin of 12.5% of the bogus purchases will be reasonable. Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in ITA No 5115 & 5116/Mum/2015 dated 15/08/2017 for A.Y 2009-10 and 2010-11 in appellan…

ITO 22(3)(6), Mumbai vs. Ramniklal K Vora (HUF), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito-22(3)(6), Ramniklal K. Bora (Huf), 206, 2Nd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Plot 357, Rn 19/19, 1St Floor, Vs. Lal Baugh, Parel, Shamji Ladha, Bldg. Bhandarkar Mumbai-400012. Road, Matunga, Mumbai-400019. Pan No. Aaahv 3842 H Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Sanjay J. Sethi, Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 02/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2021

…e raised grounds of appeal mainly on the purchases not being genuine. Ld. CIT(A) has considered the corresponding onward sales and came to the decision. By respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of CIT vrs. Smith P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj), we are inclined to agree with the findings of Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. Facts being identical, our decision for AY 2009-10 applies mutatis mutandis to AY 2010-11. 7. In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 05/08/2021. (RAVISH SOOOD) ACC…

M/S Roopa Trading Co., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 17(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Blem/S. Roopa Trading Co. V. Income Tax Officer -17(3)(2) 138, 2Nd Floor Kautilya Bhavan, 1St Floor Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 Gagdevi Street Masjid Bunder Mumbai - 400003 Pan: Aajfr5373A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Smita Verma

…e finished goods as a natural corollary not the entire amount covered under such purchases would be subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451]. Simply because the parties were not produced the entire purchases cannot be added as held by the 4 M/s. Roopa Trading Co. Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Nikunj Eximp [216 Taxman.com 171]. However, at the same time keeping in view the nature of business of the assessee and the fact that the assessee is making some local purchases withou…

ITO 28 (3)(5), Navi Mumbai vs. M/S Yash Infotech, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is 'Partly Allowed'

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 28(3)(5) V. M/S. Yash Infotech Room No. 323, 3Rd Floor 54, Arneja Corner Vashi Railway Station Complex Plot No. 71, Sector – 17 Vashi, Navi Mumbai -400703 Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400705 Pan: Aaafy4596R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By Shri T.S. Khalsa

…onsidered this aspect of the matter elaborately with reference to the 4 M/s. Yash Infotech submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451] restricted the disallowance to 12.5% of the non-genuine purchases of ₹.70,13,767/-, while holding so, the Ld.CIT(A) observed as under: - “6. I have considered the facts of the case and the appellant's submissions. 7. Grounds 1 to 5 of the appeal are against addition of Rs. 70,13,767/- being 100% bogus purchases. As per the investigations carried…

ACIT- Circle- 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gala Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…on certain purchases treated as unexplained expenditure. Assessing Officer did not doubt the sales made by the assessee from out of such purchases. Assessing Officer based on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] estimated the profit element in such purchases at 12.5% and by reducing the Gross Profit already declared by the assessee. In the circumstances, we hold that there is no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars as the profit element was determined by way of adhoc estimation. Coming to the interest, the assessee furnished com…

Income Tax Officer-28 (1)(5), Mumbai vs. Ganesh Engineering Workshop, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…on certain purchases treated as unexplained expenditure. Assessing Officer did not doubt the sales made by the assessee from out of such purchases. Assessing Officer based on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] estimated the profit element in such purchases at 12.5% and by reducing the Gross Profit already declared by the assessee. In the circumstances, we hold that there is no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars as the profit element was determined by way of adhoc estimation. Coming to the interest, the assessee furnished com…

ITO, 28(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Vimal Babulal Shrimal, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 979/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) The Income Tax Officer Shri Vimal Babulal Shrimal, Ward 28(3)(4),Room No. 320, 3 Rd Plot No.16, Janta Market, Floor, 6Th Tower, Vashi Railway फनाभ/ Sector-23, Turbhe, Navi Station Complex, Vashi, Mumbai-400 705 Vs. Maharashtra-400703 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Anmps6054M अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Bharat Andhle, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Deepak Raje, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 29.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-26, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Cit(A)-26/It/338/2015-16 Vide Dated 14.12.2018. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(3)(4), Mumbai (In Short Acit / Ao) For The A.Y. 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 05.01.2016 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). Shri Vimal Babulal Shrimal, Ay 09-10 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) Restricting The Addition Made By Assessing Officer Of Bogus Purchases At 12.5% By Estimating The Profit Rate As Against 100% Addition Made By Assessing Officer. For This, Revenue Has Raised The Following 2 Grounds: -

…sclosed parties in the grey market at lower rates and purchases were shown as being made form the impugned parties to suppress its profits. In such a situation, the various courts including the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 have held that not the entire purchases but only the profit element embedded in these purchases was to be disallowed and accordingly held 12.5% of the purchases will be reasonable as profit on margin against the bogus purchases. In view of this decision of Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court (supra), the addition made by the Assessing Officer is restricte…

ITO 28(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Shri. Joseph Santa Lopez, Panvel

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6449/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito 28(1)(4), Shri Joseph Santa Lopez R. No. 330, 3Rd Floor Tara Chs Ltd, Plot No.16, बिाम/ Tower No. 6 Sector-16, Roadpali Kalamboli, Vs. Vashi Railway Station Complex Tal: Panvel, Dist-Raigad, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Maharashtra-410 206. स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaapl-5131-B (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Usha Gaikwad, Ld. Sr. Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 29/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 29/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

…undisclosed parties in the grey market at lower rates and procured the bills from these suppliers to suppress the profits. Therefore, it would be prudent to make estimated additions as per the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT V/s Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451). Finally the estimation was made at 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases of Rs.54.65 Lacs. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 6. After going impugned order, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has clinched the issue in the right perspective. The sale was not under doubt and there could be no sale without actual purchase of material keeping i…

ITO 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Falcon Architectural Systems P Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

…ns 4 A.Y.2010-11 Ltd. 250 taxman 0022 (SC) apply to the case. Therefore, the saving on account of VAT and other incidental charges made by the appellant on the said bogus purchases can be brought to as additional profit. In the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth, 356 ITR 451, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has upheld estimation @ 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases by finding as under: "If the payments to the above mentioned parties are made through cheque and the subsequent sales made have been accepted in total by the assessing officer, then it can be concluded that purchases have been made from persons in the open market…

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

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2288/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Vaghasiya Exports Pr. Cit-32 Ae-2080, 2Nd Floor C-11, 2Nd Floor, Pratyakshakar Bhavan बिाम Bharat Diamond Bourse Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) / Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai- 400 051. Mumbai 400 051 Pan: Aaafa-2061-Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram- Ld. Sr. Counsel Revenue By : Shri H.N.Singh – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/05/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 27/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Challenges The Invocation Of Revisional Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-32, Mumbai (Pr. Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Vide Order Dated 18/03/2019. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:- 1. The Ld. Pr.Cit Erred In Passing Revision U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) Revising Assessment Order Passed U/S.143(3) On The Issue Of Addition Of Alleged Bogus Purchases Without Appreciating That Assessment Order U/S. 143(3) Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue As During Assessment Proceedings Ld. Ao Had Specifically Raised Queries Pertaining To Alleged Bogus Purchases & After Considering The Evidences Produced By The Appellant, Made

…d in para 6.4 of the assessment order, 4 M/s Vaghasiya Exports Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ld.AO estimated an addition of 1.6% against these purchases. The decisions being relied upon include the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Simit P. Sheth Vs. CIT (356 ITR 451); CIT Vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (355 ITR 290); M/s. Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. CIT (58 Taxmann.com 44). It has been submitted before us that the assessment order has attained finality since no further appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the same. 5.1 Subsequently, upon perusal of case records, Ld. Pr. CIT opined that the order was er…

DCIT 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shobha Ansar Jewllery Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 2053/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 2054/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 2055/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Shobha Asar Jewellery Tax-8(2)(1), Aayarka Bhawan, Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 624, M.K. Rd., फनाभ/ 78-B, Sunshine Building, Mumbai-400 020 Dr. Annie Besant Road, Vs. Worli, Mumbai-400 018 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Allcs9865R अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Bharat Andhle, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : None ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 27.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Appeals Of The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-14, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Cit(A)-14/It-104C/16-17, Cit(A)-14/It-

…which is approximately nearer to the truth, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and following the judicial decisions of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s. Bholenath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) and simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj), I am of the considered opinion that 12.5% of the total amount of 1,99,81,707/- which comes to ₹24,97,713/- be taken an unproved/ non- ITA Nos.2053-2055/Mum/2019 M/s Shobha Asar Jewellery Pvt. Ltd.; 13-14 to 14-15 genuine purchases and added to the total income returned. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is i…

ITO, Ward 3(4), Kalyan vs. Smt Sunita C Khandelwal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 3505/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal Ward-3(4), Kalyan Prop. Amita Steel 2N D Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Corporation, फनाभ/ Road, Kalyan-421301 E-1/5, Near Avery Bridge, Kalyan Shill Road, Midc, Vs. Dombivali (E)-421203 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Afgpk6867E अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Bharat Andhale, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Rajendra Deshpande, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-1, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. 10352/2017-18 Vide Dated 19.03.2019. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(4), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Y. 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 15.12.2017 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal; Ay 10-11 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A) Restricting The Disallowance Of Bogus Purchase/ Unproved Purchases At 12.5% By Estimating The Gross Profit Under Section 69C Of The Act Instead Of 100% Disallowance Made By Assessing Officer.

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “D” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष एविं श्री ए रयपऔय यहभान, रेखा दस्म के भक्ष BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आमकय अऩीर िं./ ITA No. 3505/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal Ward-3(4), Kalyan Prop. Amita Steel 2n d Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Corporation, फनाभ/ Road, Kalyan-421301 E-1/5, Near Avery Bridge, Kalyan Shill Road, MIDC, Vs. Dombivali (E)-421203 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./PAN No. AFGPK6867E…

Asst CIT 6 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. India Steel Works Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly. Appellant gets part relief. This ground is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 6995/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 7057/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) The Asst. Commissioner Of India Steel Works Ltd. 1101, 11 Th Floor, India Bull Income Tax 5Th Floor, Room No. 506, Aayakar फनाभ/ Finance Centre, S.B. Marg, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Elphistone (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aaaci1362A अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : None ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Appeals Of The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-12, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal Nos. Cit(A)-12/Dcit-6(3)(1)/367/16-17 & Cit(A)- 12/Dcit-6(3)(1)/B2-393/16-17 Vide Dated 17.07.2019 & 27.08.2019. The Assessments Were Framed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income

…ns Ltd. 250 taxman 0022(SC) would not apply to the case. Therefore, the saving on account of VAT and other incidential charges made by the appellant on the said bogus purchases can be brought to tax as additional profit. In the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has upheld estimation@12.5% of alleged bogus purchases by holding as High Court has ITA Nos.6995 & 7057/Mum/2019 India Steel Works Ltd.; AYs 11-12 & 09-10 upheld estimation @12.5% of alleged bogus purchases by holding as under: If the payments to be abovementioned parties are made thorough cheque and the subsequent sa…

ITO 33(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Juglesh Suresh Gupta, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 33(2)(1) V. Shri Juglesh Suresh Gupta Room No. 845, 8Th Floor 131, Jetwa Niwas Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc Gautam Chs Ld., Parle (W) Bandra(W), Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai -400057 Pan: Aripg0154A (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee By : Department By Shri Smita Verma

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Income Tax Officer – 33(2)(1) v. Shri Juglesh Suresh Gupta Room No. 845, 8th Floor 131, Jetwa Niwas Kautilya Bhavan, BKC Gautam CHS Ld., Parle (W) Bandra(W), Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai -400057 PAN: ARIPG0154A (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee by : Department by Shri Smita Verma Date of Hearing : 12.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 12.07.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–45, Mumbai [here…