CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

ITO-15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sanjaykumar Shankarlal Export Private Limited, Navi Mumba

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

…conclusion on merits and dismiss the Revenue’s appeal on this issue. 22. We may add that the view taken by the learned CIT(A) finds substantial reinforcement from the judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [(2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)] and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Ram Builders [(2023) 146 taxmann.com 447 (Bom)], wherein it was unequivocally held that when the sales corresponding to the purchases are accepted, the entire purchases cannot be disallowed. Only the profit component embedded therein can be brought to tax, as it would be contrary to commercial l…

ACIT 27 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Bhavesh Ranchhodas Madiyar, Mumbai

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

…conclusion on merits and dismiss the Revenue’s appeal on this issue. 22. We may add that the view taken by the learned CIT(A) finds substantial reinforcement from the judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [(2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)] and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Ram Builders [(2023) 146 taxmann.com 447 (Bom)], wherein it was unequivocally held that when the sales corresponding to the purchases are accepted, the entire purchases cannot be disallowed. Only the profit component embedded therein can be brought to tax, as it would be contrary to commercial l…

ACIT 27 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Bhavesh Ranchhodas Madiyar, Mumbai

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

…conclusion on merits and dismiss the Revenue’s appeal on this issue. 22. We may add that the view taken by the learned CIT(A) finds substantial reinforcement from the judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [(2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)] and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Ram Builders [(2023) 146 taxmann.com 447 (Bom)], wherein it was unequivocally held that when the sales corresponding to the purchases are accepted, the entire purchases cannot be disallowed. Only the profit component embedded therein can be brought to tax, as it would be contrary to commercial l…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Sha Tarachand Fojmal and Company, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

…ate of profit of 5.54% to the impugned purchases, thereby acknowledging that the assessee had, in fact, effected sales corresponding to such purchases. 7. It is well settled through a catena of judicial pronouncements, including CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth [(2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj.)], that in cases of purchases found to be non-genuine but corresponding sales having been accepted, only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be brought to tax, and not the entire amount. The rationale is that the assessee might have procured goods from the grey market at discounted rates, resulting in savings of VAT and other…

Anil K. Shah HUF, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2009-10 Anil K. Shah (Huf), Income Tax Officer, 703, Supershav, Nahur Road, Ward-41(2)(1), Sarvodaya Nagar, Vs. Room No. 636, Mulund (West), Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400080. Bandra Kurla Complex, Pan : Aadha5072M Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Devendra Jain & Shri Shashank Mehta For Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-09-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 25-04-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10, Challenging The Sustenance Of Levy Of Penalty Of Rs. 6,96,096/- U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟).

…ases made from two bogus traders amounting to Rs. 17,19,214/- and thereafter, our reference was drawn to the Tribunal‟s order, wherein the addition was restricted to 12.5%, following the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 451 (Guj). It was submitted that the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has recorded clear finding that it is a case of bogus purchases and the said order has since attained finality and the assessee has not challenged the said order before the Hon‟ble High Court and the said findings have a clear bearing on the issue of levy of penalty in absence of…

ITO-19(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kobe Steel India, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5623/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, Ward v/s. M/s Kobe Steel India 19(2)(2), 450, Lotwala Bldg. बनाम 450, Lotwala Bldg. Pathebapurao Marg, Near Pathebapurao Marg, Near Singhi Gali, Mumbai 400004, Maharashtra Singhi Gali, Mumbai 400 004, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAAFK2456L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी For Assessee : Shri Vimal Punmiya, AR For Revenue : Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing 24.07.202…

ITO 23(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Chinar Gems, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-appeal for the

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…her appeal, the learned CIT(A) estimated 12.5% of the bogus purchases as an addition to be made instead of confirming the entire bogus purchases, placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to t…

Chinar Gems, Bg Kher Road Worli, Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 23(1)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber

In the result, the cross-appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…her appeal, the learned CIT(A) estimated 12.5% of the bogus purchases as an addition to be made instead of confirming the entire bogus purchases, placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to t…