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 367,368 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

Sobhagmull Gokal Chand Jewellers, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 3767/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sunil HiravatFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

…% of the value and the same was disallowed/added. 5. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and the CBDT Instruction No.2/08 dated 22.02.2008 and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] he restricted the profit element from such purchases at 3% as against 5% estimated by the Assessing Officer. 6. Before me, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities. He also submitted that the dealers have confirmed the sales made to the assessee. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee further submit…

DCIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Diasqua India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3234/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidiasqua India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit-5(1)(2) Room No.568, 5Th Floor Cw-6061,6062,6063,6071 Bharath Diamond Bourse Aaykar Bhawan Bkc, Bandra(E) M.K.Road Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaccd3418N Appellant) .. Respondent) & Dcit-5(1)(2) Vs. Diasqua India Pvt.Ltd. Room No.568, 5Th Floor Cw-6061,6062,6063,6071 Aaykar Bhawan Bharath Diamond Bourse M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaccd3418N Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Suchek Achalia, Ar Revenue By Somnath Wajale, Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…pined that when the AO was not doubted sales declared by the assessee, the purchases cannot be doubted, because sales without purchases cannot be possible. Therefore, by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P.Seth [356 ITR 451 (2013)] scaled down additions made by the AO towards alleged bogus purchases to 12.5% of so called bogus 6 & 3234/Mum/2016 purchases from above four parties. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee, as well as the revenue is in appeal before us. 6. The first issue that came up for our consideration from the assessee’s appeal from ground No…

Diasqua India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 5 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2283/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidiasqua India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit-5(1)(2) Room No.568, 5Th Floor Cw-6061,6062,6063,6071 Bharath Diamond Bourse Aaykar Bhawan Bkc, Bandra(E) M.K.Road Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaccd3418N Appellant) .. Respondent) & Dcit-5(1)(2) Vs. Diasqua India Pvt.Ltd. Room No.568, 5Th Floor Cw-6061,6062,6063,6071 Aaykar Bhawan Bharath Diamond Bourse M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaccd3418N Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Suchek Achalia, Ar Revenue By Somnath Wajale, Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…pined that when the AO was not doubted sales declared by the assessee, the purchases cannot be doubted, because sales without purchases cannot be possible. Therefore, by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P.Seth [356 ITR 451 (2013)] scaled down additions made by the AO towards alleged bogus purchases to 12.5% of so called bogus 6 & 3234/Mum/2016 purchases from above four parties. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee, as well as the revenue is in appeal before us. 6. The first issue that came up for our consideration from the assessee’s appeal from ground No…

Suresh Mulchand Shah HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO - WD- 19(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 6407/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6407 & 6208/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S. Suresh Mulchand Shah बिधम/ Ito, Ward 19(3)(4) Matru Mandir, Mumbai Huf Vs. Shop No. A-1B, Mahavir Darshan, Saidham Complex, 26 Khambata Lane, Mumbai-400004. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahs0924H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/07/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 29, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2010-11 & 2011-12. Ita. Nos.6407 & 6208/M/2018 A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147

…t case, the appellant has miserably failed to lead evidence.” 7. On appraisal of the above said finding, we noticed that the CIT(A) has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) (Guj). Profit embedded to the bogus purchase has been considered and accordingly CIT(A) has decided the matter of controversy. The CIT(A) has considered the copies of the invoices furnished by the appellant and also considered the VAT leviable upon the goods which was @ 4% and accordingly, the profit ratio was considered @ 2.5% of the profit mar…

Hitesh Tilokchand Bohra, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4946/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148

…ed for verification and therefore no verification could be made. None of these findings were rebutted with evidences. I find that the Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions and 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 from these purchases at 6% i.e. 4% being VAT on steel and iron and additional margin of 2%. I see no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and I uphold the same. (A.Ys: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Shri Hitesh Tilokchand Bohra 9. In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed Order pronounced in the open court…

Abdul Hakim Abdul Waheed Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO 20 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 505/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 505/Mum/2019 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Abdul Hakim Abdul Waheed The Income Tax Officer, Khan Ward 20(1)(2) 108, Sunder Das Saw Mill Mumbai Vs. Compound, B.P.T. Plot, B.N. Pai Marg, Reay Road (W), Mumbai-400 010 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Ahrpk2330H

For Appellant: Mr. Ravindra Poojary, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…he returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in paras 5.6 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “5.6 The Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad 'C' Bench in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. ACIT 58 lTD 0428 held that in similar circumstances, 25% of the purchase price accounted through fictitious invoices has to be disallowed. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oil cakes v/s CIT 316 ITR 0274 dealt with…

Bafna Metal Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4389/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar SinghFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…he returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the action of the AO by observing in para 7.8 & 7.9 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the 3 case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “7.8 As the AO concluded that the appellant has not purchased from those parties, but considering the facts of the case that the goods have been sold and the assessee offered the profit on sale for taxation, treated the purchases are from the grey market at a lower price which carries higher margin of profit than the…

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

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4388/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Singh/For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…/- to the returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the action of the AO by observing in para 7 3 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “7. The Ground No. 2 of the appeal is about addition made by the AO by treating 12.5% of the non genuine purchases as income of the appellant. During the course of appellate proceedings, even after being given opportunity on various dates with sufficient time to comply, appellant did not furnish any submissions to pr…

Shri Ramesh Rajmal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4367/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4367/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Shri Ramesh Rajmal Jain The Income Tax Officer, 97/99, Maruti Mandir Marg, 5 Th Ward 19(3)(1) Vs. Kumbharwada, Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 004 Mumbai-400 007 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aacpj5480F

For Appellant: Shri Rushubh Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…urned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirm the action made by the AO by observing in paras 7.3.5 & 7.3.6 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “7.3.6 In the present case, AO concluded that the assessee indulged in non-genuine transaction and intention of indulging in such activity is to suppress the true profits and to reduce the tax liability. Therefore, an addition on 3 account of a higher margin of profit is fair and equitable. In the decision of Hon'bl…

Shri Narpat H. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4366/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ncome of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in paras 6.3.5 & 6.3.6 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High 3 court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “6.3.5 In the present case, AO concluded that the assessee indulged in non-genuine transaction and intention of indulging in such activity is to suppress the true profits and to reduce the tax liability. Therefore, an addition on account of a higher margin of profit is fair and equitable. In the decision of Hon'ble G…

Ahan Apparel P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 9(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2230/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am M/S Ahan Apparel Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit-9(1)(1) D-202, Sonmarg Apartment, Mumbai S.V.Mart, Malad West Mumbai-400 064 Pan/Gir No.Aaeca0983D Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 131Section 68

…tra Sales Tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, therefore, after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon various judicial precedence, including the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P. Simith Sheth vs CIT (356 ITR 451) estimated 12.5% profit on alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs.8,18,04,105/- and made additions of Rs.1,02,25,513/- to the total income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has reiterated its submissions made before the Assessing Off…

Rooplaxmi Steel, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4410/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…e preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who restricted the addition @ 12.5% of the bogus purchases as against made by the AO, by observing in paras 7.3.5 & 7.3.6 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “7.3.5 In the present case, AO concluded that the assessee indulged in non-genuine transaction and intention of indulging in such activity is to suppress the true profits and to reduce the tax liability. Therefore, an addition on account of a higher margin of profit is fair and equitable. In the decision of Hon'ble G…

M/S.Virat Pipes & Tubes, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4401/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4401/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) M/S Virat Pipes & Tubes The Income Tax Officer 59Th Nanubhai Desai Road Ward 19(3)(5) Vs. Khetwadi Main Road, Mittal Court, Nariman Point Mumbai-400 004 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaefv8845L

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja M Chhawachharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147

…d income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in paras 6.3.5 & 6.3.6 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) by observing as under: “6.3.5 In the present case, AO concluded that the assessee indulged in non-genuine transaction and intention of indulging in such activity is to suppress the true profits and to reduce the tax liability. Therefore, an addition on account of a higher margin of profit is fair and equitable. In the decision of Hon'ble G…

Income Tax Officer-19(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Shankarlal L. Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 427/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shri Shankarlal L. Jain, The Ito-18(3)(3), 577/579, Om Shanti Bhavan, (Erstwhile Ito 19(3)(3), Khatavi Building, Jss Rd, Earnest House, Opp. Chandanwadi, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400002 Pan: Aabpj3924F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The Ito-19(3)(3), Shri Shankarlal L. Jain, Matru Mandir, 2Nd Floor, Bokadia Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 219, Tardeo Road, 577/579, Om Shanti Bhavan, Mumbai - 400007 Vs. Khatavi Building, Jss Rd, Opp. Chandanwadi, Mumbai - 400002 Pan: Aabpj3924F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Sanghvi (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25/04/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/07/2019

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Sanghvi (CA)For Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (DR)
Section 143Section 148

…in the light of the rival contentions of the parties. We notice that the Ld. CIT (A) has restricted the addition to 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases by following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj). We further notice that the AO has not rejected the sale shown by the assessee. Under these circumstances, the Ld. CIT (A) has rightly held that profit from business cannot be ascertained without deducting cost of purchase from sales. So far as the estimation of profit is concerned, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the Assessment Ye…

Shri Shankarlal L. Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-19(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 178/MUM/2018[200910]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shri Shankarlal L. Jain, The Ito-18(3)(3), 577/579, Om Shanti Bhavan, (Erstwhile Ito 19(3)(3), Khatavi Building, Jss Rd, Earnest House, Opp. Chandanwadi, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400002 Pan: Aabpj3924F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The Ito-19(3)(3), Shri Shankarlal L. Jain, Matru Mandir, 2Nd Floor, Bokadia Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 219, Tardeo Road, 577/579, Om Shanti Bhavan, Mumbai - 400007 Vs. Khatavi Building, Jss Rd, Opp. Chandanwadi, Mumbai - 400002 Pan: Aabpj3924F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Sanghvi (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25/04/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/07/2019

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Sanghvi (CA)For Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (DR)
Section 143Section 148

…in the light of the rival contentions of the parties. We notice that the Ld. CIT (A) has restricted the addition to 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases by following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj). We further notice that the AO has not rejected the sale shown by the assessee. Under these circumstances, the Ld. CIT (A) has rightly held that profit from business cannot be ascertained without deducting cost of purchase from sales. So far as the estimation of profit is concerned, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the Assessment Ye…

Income Tax Officer-11(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Shree Gajanana Industries (India) Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed, accordingly

ITA 6242/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Chaudhary Arun Kumar- Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…1 Shree Gajanana Industries (India) Private Limited आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “जी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। Assessment Year-2011-12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी संद"प गोसांई, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 6242/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) िनधा"रणवष" Income tax Officer-11(2)(2) M/s. Shree Gajanana Ind. (I) Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 349, Aaykar Bhavan C-7, Ground Floor, बनाम नाम नाम/ नाम M.K.Marg Hind Surashtra Indl. Estate…

Ashoka Builders, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2244/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Blem/S. Ashoka Builders V. The Asst. Cit Range – 19(3) 209-212, Veena Beena Piramal Chamber Turner Road, Bandra (W) Mumbai – 400012 Mumbai – 400 050 Pan: Aabfa 3175 B (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja Department By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 133(6)

…x but only the profit element embedded therein. The Hon'ble High Court confirmed the order of the ITAT in estimating the profit element from purchases at 12.5%. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and confirmed the order of the ITAT in estimating the profit element from the purchases at 12.5%. The Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Nikunj Eximp 5 M/s. Ashoka Builders [216 Taxman.com 171] held that simply because the parties were not produced the entire purchases cannot be added. 8. In view of the above decisions and taking all the…

Income Tax Officer 12(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ami Riddhi Chem Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 5358/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Blem/S. Ami Riddhi Chem Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – 9(1)(1) Office No. 16, 2Nd Floor Room No. 226/262, 2Nd Floor Building B-1, Laxmi Nivas Chs Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pai Nagar, S.V. Road Mumbai-400 020 Borivali (W), Mumbai – 400 092 Pan: Aagca 7111 H (Assessee) (Respondent) Income Tax Officer – 12(1)(1) V. M/S. Ami Riddhi Chem Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 226, 2Nd Floor Office No. 3, Gokul Apartment Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Haridas Nagar, Shimpoli Road Mumbai-400 020 Borivali (W), Mumbai – 400 092 Pan: Aagca 7111 H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Singh Department By : Shri Abdul Hakeem M

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Shri Abdul Hakeem M

…e profit element in the purchases have to be considered when the sales have been accepted by the Assessing Officer. He followed the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd., [355 ITR 290], CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451], CIT v. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries [316 ITR 274] and various other decisions, while holding so he observed as under: - “5.3. I have gone through the assessment order and submissions made in this regard. I have also gone through the survey report submitted by A.O. along with the remand report. It is noted that the A.O. had made addition out of pu…

Ami Riddhi Chem Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 9(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 5215/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Blem/S. Ami Riddhi Chem Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – 9(1)(1) Office No. 16, 2Nd Floor Room No. 226/262, 2Nd Floor Building B-1, Laxmi Nivas Chs Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Pai Nagar, S.V. Road Mumbai-400 020 Borivali (W), Mumbai – 400 092 Pan: Aagca 7111 H (Assessee) (Respondent) Income Tax Officer – 12(1)(1) V. M/S. Ami Riddhi Chem Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 226, 2Nd Floor Office No. 3, Gokul Apartment Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Haridas Nagar, Shimpoli Road Mumbai-400 020 Borivali (W), Mumbai – 400 092 Pan: Aagca 7111 H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Singh Department By : Shri Abdul Hakeem M

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Shri Abdul Hakeem M

…e profit element in the purchases have to be considered when the sales have been accepted by the Assessing Officer. He followed the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd., [355 ITR 290], CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451], CIT v. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries [316 ITR 274] and various other decisions, while holding so he observed as under: - “5.3. I have gone through the assessment order and submissions made in this regard. I have also gone through the survey report submitted by A.O. along with the remand report. It is noted that the A.O. had made addition out of pu…

Aggarwal Associates (Promoters) Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result the ground No

ITA 787/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumaraggarwal Associates Vs Dcit, Central Circle, (Promoters) Ltd., Ghaziabad 10, New Rajdhani Enclave, Vikas Marg, Delhi- 92 (Pan: Aaaca2789D)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

…trader and that the Tribunal retained 12% of the purchase towards its possible profit, we do not find any reason to entertain the appeal. In the result, Tax Appeal is dismissed." 4.8 Similar view has also been expressed in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 wherein it has been held as under: "6. In the present case, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) believed that when as a trader in steel the assessee sold certain quantity of steel; he would have purchased the same quantity from some source. When the total sale is accepted by the Assessing Officer, he could not have questioned the very bas…