CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

356 ITR 451High Court2013#27 most cited

What is CIT v. Simit P. Sheth authority for?

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

1,465

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth · section 69C · bogus purchases · undisclosed income · addition on profit element · gross profit · net profit · reassessment · assessment procedure

Also reported as

38 Taxmann 385

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 132Section 131Section 69CSection 133(6)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 69csection 131section 133(6)reassessment proceedingsundisclosed incomesearch and seizuresection 69section 132section 13section 148businesssection 147

Judgments citing CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

ITO Ward 6 (3)(3), Mumbai vs. Jinharsh Industrial Solutions Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the ground No

ITA 6556/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 6(3)(3) V. M/S. Jinharsh Industrial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., {Earlier Known As Jiharsh Trading Pvt. Ltd.,} Room No. 524, 5Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Karnani Niwas, 34, Nagdevi Street, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400003 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacj1110B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By Smita Verma

For Appellant: None
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

…nce, keeping in view of any possibility of the revenue leakage in the present case, the disallowance of purchases of steel at 5% of the purchases would meet the end of justice. Similar view was taken by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Simiih P Seth [2013(356 ITR 451)] and by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Hariram Bhambani ITA No 313 of2013. 8. Thus, respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Simit P Seth supra and by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Hariram Bhambani (supra), the disallowance of cost of purchases of steel is restricted to 5% of the purchases. The assessing officer i…

ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Acme Solvents Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the ground No

ITA 6551/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 6(1)(1) V. M/S. Acme Solvents Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 503, 5Th Floor 6, 2Nd Floor, Samuel Street Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400003 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadca9369E (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee By : Department By Sanjay J. Sethi

For Appellant: Department by Sanjay J. Sethi
Section 143(1)Section 147

…bility of the revenue leakage in the present case, the disallowance of purchases of steel at 5% of the purchases would meet the end of justice. Similar view was taken by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Simiih P Seth 5 M/s. ACME Solvents Pvt. Ltd., [2013(356 ITR 451)] and by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Hariram Bhambani ITA No 313 of2013. 8. Thus, respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Simit P Seth supra and by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Hariram Bhambani (supra), the disallowance of cost of purchases of steel is restricted to 5% of the purchases. The assessing officer i…

Hasmukh Jagshi Visaria, Thane vs. ITO 1 (1) Kalyan, Kalyan

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

ITA 2302/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…it element in the said alleged bogus purchases. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to make the addition @ 12.5% by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj). 5. Now the assessee is again in appeal before us challenging the said part confirmation of the addition. 6. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that the assessee is a wholesale dealer and supplier of various type of paper. The Ld. A.R. submitted before us that the profit margin on these items is…

ACIT 28(2), Navi Mumbai vs. M/S Lucid Prints, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 31/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita No. 31/Mum/2020 (यनधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2009-10) The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Lucid Prints Income Tax, Circle 28(2), Room Plot No.A-227, Ttc फनाभ/ No.307, 3Rd Floor, Tower No.6, Industrial Area, Mahape, Vashi Railway Station Complex, Navi Mumbai-400 710 Vs. Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा सं./Pan No. Aaafl0710G

For Appellant: Shri Brajendra Kumar, DRFor Respondent: None
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…IT(A) order. The CIT(A) found that the Assessing Officer has made the addition considering the GP rate @ 36% and the A.O. has not doubted the sales. Further the CIT(A) relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 (Guj) and has restricted the profit/income element rate @ 12.5% of the bogus purchases as against @ 36% adopted by the Assessing Officer and partly allowed the appeal. Aggrieved, by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has filed an appeal before the Honble Tribunal. 6.At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf the assessee. The learned DR v…

ITO 28 (3)(5), Mumbai vs. Shri. Yusuf Ahmed Solanki (Proprietor of, /S Sayco Enerprises), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 6837/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.6837/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Income Tax Officer ……………. Appellant Ward–28(3)(5), Mumbai v/s Shri Yusuf Ahmed Solanki Proprietor of M/s. Sayco Enterprises 54, Sector–1A, Timber Market ……………. Respondent Koperkhairne, Navi Mumbai 400 705 PAN – AERPS1196J Revenue by : Shri T.S. Khalsa Assessee by : None Date of Hearing – 18.05.2021 Date of Order – 08.07.2021 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue…

ACIT-26(1), Mumbai vs. Auro Engineering, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6197/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…with section 147 of the Act dated 21.11.2015. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 28% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 M/s. Auro Engineering order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v…

ITO-22(3)(6) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Shri Shripal Hastimal Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6196/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…with section 147 of the Act dated 31.01.2014. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 25% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 Shri Shripal Hastimal Jain order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of…

Income Tax Officer-26(2) (3), Mumbai vs. Juzer Abdullabhai Kanchwala, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6188/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ith section 147 of the Act dated 07.03.2016. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 Mr. Juzer Abdullabhai Kanchwala order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the cas…

Income Tax Officer -13(3) (3), Mumbai vs. Mangalam Infra Development Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6184/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…section 143(3) of the Act dated 18.03.2016. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 14.89% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) and following the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case in ITA No.6106/M/2016 dated 22.09.2017 A.Y 2011-12 wherein the rate of 11% has been applied on the bogus purchases by holding that during the year the GP rate of the assessee was 14.89% and the same should be applied to tax the bogus purchases. 3 M/s. Mangalam Infra…

ITO- 26(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Rajkumar Jivram Mishra, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6119/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ith section 147 of the Act dated 11.12.2017. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 Mr. Rajkumar Jivram Mishra order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of…

ITO, 26(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mausumi Ranjan Das, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6118/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…with section 147 of the Act dated 27.12.2017. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 25% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 Ms. Mausumi Ranjan Das order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT…

ACIT 17 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Rashmi Bearing Co, Mumbai

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

ITA 5732/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5732/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-17(3) बिधम/ M/S. Rashmi Bearing Co. Room No.122, 1St Floor, 115, Room No.7, 2Nd Floor Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, G- Block Nagdevi Street, Mumbai- Bkc, Mumbai-400051. 400003. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaefr2683Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Ms. Smita Verma (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Gandhi सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/04/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 17.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. "Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Justified In Restricting The Addition Made By The Ao To 12.5% Of Bogus Purchases As Against The Addition Made At 17.04% Of The Bogus Purchases, Ignoring That There Was No Compliance To The Notices Issued U/S 133(6) By Ao & The Assessee Was Also Unable To Prove The Genuineness Of The. Purchases Either, By Producing The Suppliers For Examination Or By Furnishing

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh GandhiFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma (Sr. AR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)

…and therefore, appeal is partly allowed.” 5. On appraisal of the above mentioned finding, we noticed that the CIT(A) has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) and in the case of Meru Impex Ex. In ITA. No.2660/Mum/2017, MP Recycling Co. in ITA. No.6358/Mum/2016, Y. A. Mamaji Furnishing & Co. in ITA.’s 4756, 4757 & 4758/Mum/2014 & Manish M Shah in ITA 2975/Mum/2015 and the other judgments ITA. No. 5732/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 which have been reproduced in the order. The facts are not distinguishable at t…

Income Tax Officer-19(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bhuwal Metal & Alloys, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5124/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ith section 147 of the Act dated 24.03.2015. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 M/s. Bhuwal Metal & Alloys order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of C…

DCIT 15 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. Partytime Ice Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4360/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ith section 147 of the Act dated 27.03.2015. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (supra)…

ITO 12 (3)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Mehta Infocom Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 7678/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7678/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito-12(3)(4) बिधम/ M/S. Mehta Infocom Pvt. Room No.145, 1St Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Mehta House, Af/3, Cama Road, Mumbai-400020. Industrial Estate, Nr, Hub Mall, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400065. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafcm2000E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Ms. Usha Gaikwad (Dr) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/05/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 30.09.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -20, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Deleted. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "(1) 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty Levied By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Of Rs.4,76,659/- Without Appreciating The Facts That The Assessee Claimed Bogus Purchases In Its Original Return Of Income & Thus Furnished Inaccurate Particulars Of Income Within The Meaning Of Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Ita Nos. 7678/M/2019 A.Y.2009-10 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40Section 69C

…has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of decision in the case of CIT Vs. Sanrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. (303 ITR 83) (P & H) and CIT Vs. M. M. Rice Mills 253 ITR 17 and the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451. Moreover, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles Vs. CIT 2001 164 CTR 2009 (Guj) has held that the penalty is not leviable when the profit was estimated. Taking into account of all the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the CIT(Appeals) has decided the matter of controversy judiciously and corre…

Income Tax Officer 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Famous Fashion Pvt Ltd. ( Earliear Know As M/S Kamat Printers Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

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

ITA 5254/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

Section 147

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 5254/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2011-12) Vs. M/s. Famous Fashion ITO-15(1)(2) Room No. 15B Pvt. Ltd. Ground Floor (earlier known as M/s. Aayakar Bhavan Kamat Printers Pvt.Ltd.) M.K. Road Unit No. 359, A to Z Mumbai-400 020. Industrial Estate Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 14/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2011-12) Vs. ITO-15(1)(2) M/s. Famous Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 15B (earlier known as M/s. Ground Floor Kamat Printers Pvt. Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan Uni…

ACIT-22(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Rajesh H Sharma, Mumbai

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

ITA 5929/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5929/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit-22(3) बिधम/ Shri Rajesh H. Sharma 305, 3Rd Floor Piramal B-5, West View, 5. V. Road, Vs. Chambers, Lal Baug, Parel, Santa Cruz (W), Mumbai- Mumbai-400012. 400054. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafps4578L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Bharat Andhle (Sr.Ar) Assessee By: Shri Avinash Ravani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/06/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/06/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 11.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -34, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "1. "Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Erred In Restricting The Addition @ 12.5% Of Bogus Purchases As Against 100% Made By The Assessing Officer Misinterpreting The Judgement In The Case Of M/S Simit P Seth 656 Itr 461(Guj) & Ignoring The Fact That The Assessee Completely Tailed In Substantiating The Purchases Made From Hawala Parties & Ac Rightly A.Y.2010-11 Applied The Ratio Of The Judgment In The Case Of M/S Vijay Proteins Ltd. (1996 58 Itd 428 Ahd".

For Appellant: Shri Avinash RavaniFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle (Sr.AR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…as upheld. In the present case, the ratio of Vijay Protein, a manufacturing concern cannot be applied since the appellant is a business concern doing trading. In my opinion, the ratio of the judgement of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 461 (Guj.) is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. Here, the Hon’ble Court has held that disallowance of 12.5% of the purchases from such hawala dealers will be justified. Thus, the disallowance made by the A.O. is upheld in principle. However, the percentage is restricted from 25% to 12.5%. The ground of appeal filed by…

ITO 12 (1)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Brit Soap Machinery Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6049/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ith section 147 of the Act dated 30.11.2018. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 M/s. Brit Soap Machinery Pvt. Ltd. order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the…

ITO 26 (3)(3), Mumbai vs. Shri. Sunil Kutti Salian, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6045/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…with section 147 of the Act dated 29.01.2016. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the AO to apply rate of 25% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only profit embedded in the bogus purchases can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate 3 Shri Sunil Kutti Salian order after following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT…

ACIT 13 (3)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Weld Tech Engineers India Private Limited `, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6027/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NOs.6027 & 6028/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10& A.Y. 2010-11) M/s. Weld-Tech Engineers (I) Pvt. Ltd., ACIT-13(3)(1) v. Room No. 229/219, 2nd Floor 1/7-B, Sonal Apartments Jai Prakash Nagar Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road No.2, Govandi (E) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400050 PAN: AAACW3839Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri T.S. Khalsa Date of Hearing : 22.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 22.06.2021 O R D E R P…