How many judgments cite CIT v. Simit P. Sheth?

1,465 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Simit P. Sheth come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 132, Section 131, Section 69C.

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 367,282 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 147 Section 148 Section 132 Section 131 Section 69C Section 133(6)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 69c section 131 section 133(6)reassessment proceedings undisclosed income search and seizure section 69 section 132 section 13 section 148 business section 147

Judgments citing CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Bright Steel Centre, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4142/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunamiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay J. Sethi

Section 143(1)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC”BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.4142/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) ITA no.4143/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Bright Steel Centre 72, C.P. Tank Road 1st Floor, Charni Road ……………. Appellant Mumbai 400 004 PAN – AADFB9916F v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–19(1)(2), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Vimal Punamiya Revenue by : Shri Sanjay J. Sethi Date of Hearing – 08.12.2020 Date of Order – 28/01/2021 O R D E R Captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging two separate orders, both dated 26th March 20…

ITO 3(3), Mumbai vs. Sandeep Namdeo Chavan, Mumbai

ITA 4566/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4566/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4566/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Sandeep Namdeo ITO Ward 3(3), R. No. 8, 6th floor, B- Chavan, 1, Near Thakur Engg. बिधम/ Wing, Ashar IT Park, Works, Pokharan Road No. Road No. 16Z, Wagle Vs. 1, Upvan, Thane-400 601 Industrial Estate, Thane (w), Pin-400 604 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AFTPC1326H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant Shri Sanjay J. Sethi, DR : by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : None सुनवाईकीतारीख/…

ITO 28(1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Ganesh Engineering Workshop, Mumbai

ITA 4548/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4548/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 147

…es itself cannot be doubted as rightly adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A) that AO has not doubted sales declared by the assessee, only he suspects the purchases. 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. 7. In the net result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. Orders pronounced in the open court on 25.01.2021. sd/- (Vikas Awasthy) (S. Rifaur Rahman) न्याययकसदस्य / Judicial Member लेखासदस्य / Accountant Member मुं…

Dinesh S Dhokar, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4546/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm& Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4546/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Dinesh S. Dhokar, Ito-19(1)(4), 2Nd Floor, Room No. 222, R. No. 6, Bldg No. 1, Matru Mandir, Tardeo बिधम/ Dadarkar Compound, Vaibhav, C-Wing, 1St Raod, Mumbai-400 007 Vs. Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaapd8605N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4545/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito-19(1)(4), Smt. Anita Dinesh 2Nd Floor, Room No. 222, Dhokar, Matru Mandir, Tardeo R. No. 6, Bldg No. 1, बिधम/ Raod, Mumbai-400 007 Dadarkar Compound, Vs. Vaibhav, C-Wing, 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aacpd9237E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sethi, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…is expected to earn around 3-5%. Taking the higher margin that assessee might have earned in the alleged transaction and as per the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT and the decision of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of CIT vrs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), we are inclined to direct the AO to estimate the income @ 3% (5% - 2%) of the alleged purchases. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 9. Since, the other appeal by Shri Dinesh S. Dhokar in ITA No. 4546/Mum/2019 for Assessment Year 2010-11 are similar to the facts in above said appeal for Assessment Year 2011…

M/S Dhanlaxmi Steel Distributors, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, the ground no. 1 raised by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4539/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4539/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sethi, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…5% of the alleged bogus purchases overlooking that assessee has already declared GP ratio @ 4.89% as submitted by assessee. As per the decision Coordinate Bench of ITAT and the decision of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of CIT vrs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), we are inclined to direct the AO to estimate the income @ 7.61% (12.5% - 4.89%) of the alleged purchases. Accordingly, the ground no. 1 raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 8. With regard to other grounds of appeal, we notice that assessee has raised effectively 5 grounds and we have already adjudicated ground no. 1. With regard to g…

ITO 26(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mohd Talib Mahboob Ghonia, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4228/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 26(2)(3), Shri Mohd Talib Mahboob 3Rd Floor, Ghonia, Room No.317, 1 Roop Darshan Niwas, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Opp. Kaji Chawl, Bandra Kurla Complex, Kajupada, Bandra (East), Kurla West, Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai 400 070 Pan: Admpg 1858P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vishesh Srivastav, A.R. Revenue By : Shri S.V. Nair, Sr. A.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2021 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 31.12.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue Is Against The Part Deletion Of Addition By Ld. Cit(A) To The Tune Of 87.5% Of The Total Bogus Purchases As Against 100% Addition Made By The Ao Towards Bogus Purchases.

For Appellant: Shri Vishesh Srivastav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.V. Nair, Sr. A.R

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ly the profit embedded in the bogus purchases which can be brought to tax and not the entire purchases. In partly allowing the appeal of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) followed the order of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) wherein it has been held that only the profit element can be placed and not the entire purchases. 5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 6. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that undisputedly the assessee is beneficiary of hawala purchase en…

DCIT 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Mody Chemi Pharma Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4704/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bledcit – 14(2)(2) V. M/S. Mody Chemi Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 461, 4Th Floor Unit No. 407/408/409 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Swastik Disa Park Mumbai – 400 020 Kohinoor Printing Works L.B.S. Marg, Ghatkopar (W) Mumbai - 400086 Pan: Aadcm1808L (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee By : Department By Shri Sanjay J. Sethi

For Appellant: Department by Shri Sanjay J. Sethi

Section 143(1)Section 147

…that the Ld.CIT(A) considered this aspect of the matter elaborately with reference to the 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 addition to 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. While holding so, the Ld.CIT(A) observed as under: - “5.8 I have considered the facts of the case and submissions made by the appellant. The facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading chemicals. The Ld. Assessing Officer receive…

ITO 17(3)(5), Mumbai vs. United Plastics, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4492/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 17(3)(5) V. M/S. United Plastics Room No. 137, 1St Floor 174, Shiva Kunj Samuel Street Aayakar Bhavan Masjid Bunder, Mumbai - 400009 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aadfu1749H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Ms. Smita Verma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma

Section 147

…considered this aspect of the matter elaborately with reference to the submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. 4 M/s. United Plastics Sheth [356 ITR 451] restricted the disallowance to 12.5% of the non- genuine purchases. While holding so, the Ld.CIT(A) observed as under: - “5.2. I have given anxious thought to the entire dispute at hand which is regarding 100% addition made by the AO in relatio to the total amount of bogus purchase as described above. Further, I have also duly perused the impugn…

ITO 19 (2)(5), Mumbai vs. Princess Diam, Mumbai

ITA 4590/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4590 & 4591/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Respondent: None

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…es itself cannot be doubted as rightly adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A) that AO has not doubted sales declared by the assessee, only he suspects the purchases. By respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of CIT vrs. Smith P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) and we notice that Ld. CIT(A) has considered the guidelines given by the task force of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. As per which, in the line of business of the assessee, it is prescribed at 1- 3%. Ld. CIT(A) has adopted the highest rate i.e. 3%. Hence, we 5 I.T.A. No. 4590 & 4591/Mum/2019 M/s Princess Diam are inclined to agree…

ITO 19 (3)(5), Mumbai vs. Vivara International, Mumbai

ITA 4589/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4589/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 28Section 69

…es itself cannot be doubted as rightly adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A) that AO has not doubted sales declared by the assessee, only he suspects the purchases. 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. 7. In the net result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. Orders pronounced in the open court on 18.01.2021. (Vikas Awasthy) (S. Rifaur Rahman) न्याययकसदस्य / Judicial Member लेखासदस्य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mu…

ITO 27(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Paresh P Sanghavi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4494/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 27(2)(5) V. Paresh P. Sanghavi Room No. 421, 4Th Floor 22, Vaikunth, Sindhi Society 6Th Tower, Vashi Railway Station Complex Chembur, Mumbai - 400071 Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703 Pan: Aahps4872K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Makrand Palkar Department By Shri Sanjay J. Sethi

For Appellant: Shri Makrand Palkar

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 69C

…find that the Ld.CIT(A) considered this aspect of the matter elaborately with reference to the submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following the decision of 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. 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 No, 1 to 4 of the appeal are against the addition of peak credit of Rs.17,15,788 out of total bogus purchases of Rs. 19,60,396/- as unexpl…

Shri Lalit Nathmal Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4279/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Lalit Nathmal Shah, The Ito – 19(2)(1), 82/84, 2Nd Floor, Kika Street, Room No. 218, 2Nd Floor, Matru Gulalwadi, Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai - 400004 Vs. Grant Road (W), Pan: Acdps9498P Mumbai - 400007

For Appellant: Shri Akash Kumar (AR)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sethi (DR)

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

…the selling dealers for verifying the genuineness of purchases returned back unserved. Therefore, the Assessing Officer treated the purchases as non- genuine. However, relying upon a decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth, 356 ITR 451 (Guj), he disallowed 12.5% of the alleged non genuine purchases, thereby, making an addition of Rs. 13,19,643/-. The assessee contested the aforesaid disallowance by preferring appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals). In course of the appeal proceedings, learned Commissioner (Appeals) issued show cause notice to the assessee to explain as to…

Shri Sunder Das Sonkia, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 1383/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1383/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sunder Das Sonkia, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Sonkia Bhawan, Sms, Highway, Ward-1(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Akhps 7413 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 09/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.O., Cuke Shri Sunder Das Sonkhiya, Vs. Ward-1(2), Prop.- M/S Naveen Jewellers, Jaipur. Sonkhiya Bhawan, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur. Pan No.: Akhps 7413 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri S.R. Sharma (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeal Filed By The Assessee & The Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Arise Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur Dated 08/11/2019 For The A.Y. 2010-11. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee & The Revenue Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)

Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…been accepted. The A.O. has only doubted the 17 ITA 1383/JP/2019 & 09/JP/2020_ Sh. Sunder Das Sonkia Vs ITO sellers from whom purchases was made by assessee. He relied on the following decisions: 1. CIT Vs. Sathya Narayan P. Rathi (2013) 351 ITR 350 2. (2013) 356 ITR 451 CIT Vs. Simit P. Seth 3. Vijay Kedia (HUF) Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 197 & 248/JP/2016) decided on 29-01-2018 4. DCIT Vs. Gem Paradise (ITA No. 747 & 65/JP/12) order dated 26-12- 2017. 5. Shri Rajkumar Agarwal, the ITAT Jaipur Bench, Jaipur has decided vide ITA No. 504/JP/2013. The turnover and trading results of assessee for the last three years are as…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Madhyam Construction Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 6078/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conference) A.Y. : 2011-12 Acit, Central Circle-8, Room Vs M/S Madhyam No. 333, Ara Centre, Construction Jhandewalan Extn., New Company Pvt. Ltd., Delhi B-2/6, Plot No. 2, Ashok Nagar, Db Gupta Road, Near Faiz Chowk, Karol Bagh, New Delhi – 5 (Pan: Aadcm8688G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153A

…of bogus purchases, if they are not written off or reduced from the closing stock then, necessarily in the sale price the same is included and therefore, only gross profit on the same can be added. We find that the above arguments also supported by relying on 356 ITR 451 in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court as well as the several judicial precedents of the Coordinate Benches. The assessee has shown that in the year ending March, 2012, the gross 3 ITA NO. 6078/DEL/2016 – AY – 2011-12 profit ratio of the assessee is 9.25%. In view of this, we direct the Ld. Assessing Officer to…

ITO-26(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ajay C. Shah, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4225/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer Mr. Ajay C. Shah, 26(1)(1), 60A/11, Sion Mahavir Room No.303, 3Rd Floor, Chs Scheme, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Road No.25C, Bandra Kurla Complex, Near Jalin Bhavan, Bandra (E), Sion (W), Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai - 400022 Pan: Aaeps4543C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.01.2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ct vide order dated 18.12.2017. 5. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) partly deleted the addition to the extent of 87.50% of the bogus purchases by following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that only the profit element embedded in the bogus purchases is to be assessed and thus partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by sustaining addition to the extent of Rs.74,136/-. 3 Mr. Ajay C. Shah 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is quite r…

ITO 5 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Karteek Ferromet Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1461/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Department by Ms. Smita Verma

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

…ion entries of bogus purchases transactions @ 12.5% out of purchase price accounted through bogus invoices have been upheld as the fair profit rate out of the bogus purchases by the Hon'ble Courts and Tribunals. 8.17 In the case of CIT v. Simit P Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)(HC), the Hon'ble High Court has upheld disallowance @12.5% of such purchases. 8.18 The appellant is a dealer and under identical facts, the Hon'ble ITAT, Bombay Tribunal (H) has upheld disallowance @12.5% of such purchases in the decision date 4th April, 2017 in the case of Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 446…

ITO 5 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Karteek Ferromet Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1460/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Department by Ms. Smita Verma

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

ITO 6 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Choudhary Dredging Construction & Engineering Pvt., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1399/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 6(2)(1) V. M/S. Choudhary Dredging Construction & Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 510, 5Th Floor 124, A1 Building Aayakar Bhavan Wadala Truck Terminal M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Wadala (W), Mumbai - 400031 Pan: Aaccc5352L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Ms. Smita Verma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 69C

…find that the Ld.CIT(A) considered this aspect of the matter elaborately with reference to the submissions of the assessee and the averments in the Assessment Order and following the decision of 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. While holding so, the Ld.CIT(A) observed as under: - “4.2. I have considered the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant including the case laws cited. The AO held in the assessment order that the appellant produced the details with regard to purchases made from the…

ACIT - 28(1), Mumbai vs. Anand Phulchand Vaishya, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2998/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…der section 143(3) read with section 147 vide order dated 28.02.2015. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by sustaining the addition equal to 12.5% of the total bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by holding that the entire purchases can not be taxed but the only profit element embedded in the purchases would be brought to tax and thus allowed the appeal partly. 3 Mr. Anand Phulchand Vaishya 6. After hearing the Ld. D.R. and perusing the material on record, we observe that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is quite reasoned which h…

ITO-28(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Mr. Rajesh Haridas Menon, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2009-

ITA 3724/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The I.T.O.- 28(2)(5), Mr. Rajesh Haridas Menon, Room No. 308, Tower No. 06, Harison Urjas, Sector – 23, Vashi Railway Station - Plot No. 76, Cidco Service, Complex, Vashi, Vs. Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400703 Navi Mumbai - 400705 Pan: Aklpm3720E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar (DR)

Section 133Section 143Section 69C

…isclosed parties in the grey market at lower rates and purchases were shown 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 Gujarat High Court in this case has held that profit margin of 12.5% of the bogus purchases will be reasonable. Respectfully following the order in the case of Simit P. Sheth the addition is restricted to 12.5% of the…