CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Bharat Talakchand Doshi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Bharat Talakchand Asst. Commissioner Of Doshi, 9, Krishna Kunj, 2Nd Income Tax 17(1), R. No. Vs. Floor, 148-P K Road, 117, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mulund West, Mumbai- Road, Mumbai-400020. 400080. Pan No. Aabpd9162B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Rahul Hakani, Ar Revenue By : Mrs. Jyoti Laxmi Nayak, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2019

…ers before him in spite of opportunity being given. Considering the facts of the case, the AO held that only profit element being embedded in such purchases can be brought to tax. Accordingly, following the decision in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), the estimated the profit @ 12.5% on the non- genuine purchases of Rs.1,17,50,788/- and it comes to Rs.14,68,848/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) had given an enhancement notice u/s 251(1)(a) r.w.s. 251(2) of the Act proposing enhancement of Rs.1,02,81,94…

Anmol International, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(1)(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘ए’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI Before Shri SAKTIJIT DEY, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member ITA Nos.3434 & 3435/Mum/2016 Assessment Years:-2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s Anmol International, ITO-24(1)(3), 5, Plot No.2, Hara Hira Mumbai बनाम/ Park, Kurar Village, Vs. Malad(East), Mumbai-400097 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. AAKFA2518B "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by None Shri V.K.Chaturvedi राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 25/06/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 28/06/2019 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date of Order:…

Konark Petro Products India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT - Circle -1, Kalyan

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

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha () & Shri Ravish Sood () Konark Petro Products India P Vs Acit, Circle-1, Kalyan Ltd, 111 & 112, Anil Complex, New Link Road, Near Rwegency Marriage Hall, Ulhasnagar-421 002 Pan : Aabck1871H Appellant Respondednt

…1 ITA 3222/Mum/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI Before Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND Shri Ravish Sood (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Konark Petro Products India P vs ACIT, Circle-1, Kalyan Ltd, 111 and 112, Anil Complex, New Link Road, Near Rwegency Marriage Hall, Ulhasnagar-421 002 PAN : AABCK1871H APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri M Subramaniam Respondent by Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date of hearing 12-06-2019 Date of pronouncement 26-06-2019 O R D E R Per G Manjunatha, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Pune dated 08-…

DCIT11(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Renaissance Jewellery Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

…y the assessee were bogus purchases without taking the delivery of the goods but the entire purchases can not be treated as income and thus came to the conclusion on the basis of decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 only profit element on the said purchases could be assessed. The Ld. CIT(A) further observed 3 M/s. Renaissance Jewellery Ltd. that the assessee is in the business of diamond jewellery in which the VAT rate is only 1% and custom duty is about 2% and thus partly sustained the addition at 3% of the said purchases by directing the AO to assess the…

Shri Kamlesh Pancharam Patel, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4358/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4359/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Shri Kamlesh Pancharam The Income Tax Officer, Patel 19(2)(2) Ground Floor, Chandralok, 37, Mumbai Vs. Ardeshir Dady Street, V.P. Road, Mumbai-400 004 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Adhpp2210P अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2019

…turned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in para 5.7 & 5.8 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 observing as under: - “5.7 I am guided by the ratio of decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs Simit P. Sheth pronounced on 16.1.2013 in tax appeal No.5531 of 2012 wherein the Hon'ble cannot be added to the income of the appellant. The Hon'ble Court have, therefore, held that fair profit rati…

Shri Kamlesh Pancharam Patel, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4358/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4359/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Shri Kamlesh Pancharam The Income Tax Officer, Patel 19(2)(2) Ground Floor, Chandralok, 37, Mumbai Vs. Ardeshir Dady Street, V.P. Road, Mumbai-400 004 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Adhpp2210P अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2019

…turned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in para 5.7 & 5.8 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 observing as under: - “5.7 I am guided by the ratio of decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs Simit P. Sheth pronounced on 16.1.2013 in tax appeal No.5531 of 2012 wherein the Hon'ble cannot be added to the income of the appellant. The Hon'ble Court have, therefore, held that fair profit rati…

Tejdeep Steels, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is treated as dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “SMC” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 4339/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 4340/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Tejdeep Steels The Income Tax Officer, 74, Bhandari Street, 1 st Ward 19(3)(5) Kumbharwada, Room No. 201, 2 nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AABFT9449F…

Tejdeep Steels, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is treated as dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “SMC” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 4339/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 4340/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Tejdeep Steels The Income Tax Officer, 74, Bhandari Street, 1 st Ward 19(3)(5) Kumbharwada, Room No. 201, 2 nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AABFT9449F…

Shri Rakesh Rasiklal Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…f tools. I am in full agreement with the argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee and according to me a profit rate of 12.5% will meet the end of justice in view of the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) but assessee has also paid the VAT element on these bogus purchases, a further deduction in estimation of profit to the extent of 7.5% can be allowed. Hence, I direct the AO to recompute the income after applying profit rate at the rate of 5% and compute the income accordingly. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 3. In the result…

Asst CIT 20(3), Mumbai vs. Mankeshwar Mechanical Works, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2623/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit 20(3) Circle 20(3) बिधम/ M/S.Mankeshwar Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Mechanical Works Vs. Piramal Chambers, Parel Mankeshwar Building, 110 Mumbai-400012. B.N. Pali Marg, Reay Road, Mumbai-400033. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abcfs2901H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri R. Sindhu (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Shailesh Joshi सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -32, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

…a relief of Rs.73,84.597/-. This ground 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 Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 2013(356 ITR 451). The CIT(A) has considered the profit embedded to the bogus purchase. The law relied by the Ld. Representative of the revenue is distinguishable on the 5 A.Y.2009-10 facts. We find it justifiable that the profit embedded to the bogus purchase is liable to be added to the income of the assessee. Since the matter of controversy has been adjudicat…

ACIT-19(2), Mumbai vs. M/S.Kwality Tubes, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G.Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodthe Acit-19(2) M/S Kwality Tubes, Room No. 207, Room No. 9,105 Ratna Sadan, Matru Mandir, 2Nd Pathan Street, Vs. Mumbai-400 007 5Th Kumbharwada Mumbai 400004

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 2085/Mum/2018 AY. 2011-12 The ACIT-19(2) Vs. M/s Kwality Tubes IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri G.Manjunatha, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member The ACIT-19(2) M/s Kwality Tubes, Room No. 207, Room No. 9,105 Ratna Sadan, Matru Mandir, 2nd Pathan Street, Vs. Mumbai-400 007 5th Kumbharwada Mumbai 400004 PAN – AADFK5452D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, D.R Respondent by: Shri Tanmay Phadke, A.R Date of Hearing: 12.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 14.06.2019 O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JM The present appeal fil…

Shri Netaram Choudhary, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleshri Netaram Chowdhary Income Tax Officer - 19(2)(4) V. Shop No. 3, Mehta Mansion Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road M.G. Mahimtura Road Mumbai – 400 007 Mumbai – 400 004 Pan: Acxpc 2305 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

…y accommodation entries without there being any transportation of materials and the assessee might have made purchases in the gray market. However, Assessing Officer following 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 at 12.5% from such purchases treated as non-genuine and added to the income of the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition and he rejected the contentions of the assessee that the reopening of assessment is bad in law. 4. Before me Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits that the ground raised on c…

Shri Girish Devichandra Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleshri Girish Devichandra Doshi Income Tax Officer - 19(1)(3) V. Room No. 220, 2Nd Floor Flat No. 8, K.Y.S. Niwas 7, Mughbhat Lane Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Khandilkar Road, Mumbai – 400 007 Mumbai – 400 004 Pan: Aacpd 4508 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

…y accommodation entries without there being any transportation of materials and the assessee might have made purchases in the gray market. However, Assessing Officer following 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 at 12.5% from such purchases treated as non-genuine and added to the income of the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition and he rejected the contentions of the assessee that the reopening of assessment is bad in law. 4. Inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment w…

Chetan Shashikant Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 13(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleshri Chetan Shashikant Shah Income Tax Officer - 13(3)(1) V. 1St Floor, Office No. 101 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 33, Dariyasthan Street Mumbai-400 020 Masjid, Mumbai – 400 003 Pan: Aacps 9153 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Shah Department By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

…y accommodation entries without there being any transportation of materials and the assessee might have made purchases in the gray market. However, Assessing Officer following 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 at 12.5% from such purchases treated as non-genuine and 3 Shri Chetan Shashikant Shah added to the income of the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition and he rejected the contentions of the assessee that the reopening of assessment is bad in law. 3. Before me Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the subm…

Income Tax Officer-19(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Madhuben Prakash Parekh, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.2079 & 2080/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2009-10) The Income Tax Officer- बिधम/ Shri Madhuben Prakash Parekh 19(2)(3), Vs. C/O M/S. Prakash Traders 51, Room No.218, 2Nd Floor, C.P. Tank Road, Mumbai- Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, 400004. Mumbai-400007. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaepp6219N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri R. Sindhu (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Rushabh Mehta सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2009-10 & 2010-11. Ita. No.2080/M/2018:- 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 10.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30

…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…

Income Tax Officer 19(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Shri Hiralal M. Jain, Mumbai

Appeal are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM I.T.A. No.5718/M/2017 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) ITO-19(1)(5) Vs. Shri Hiralal M. Jain Room No.215, Matru Jay Vijay Metal corporation, Mandir, Mumbai-400007. 1st Pathan St. 4th Kumbharwada Lane, Mumbai-400004. स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ2424L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by: None Department by: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (DR) Date of Hearing: 13.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 04/06/2019 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against the ord…

Shri Bhavin V Vora, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Bhavin V. Vora, Prop. Income Tax Officer M/S Vora Ispat, Shop No. Vs. Ward 2(1), Room No. B- 12, Narmada Complex, 25, 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Cabin Road, Nr. Public Park, Road No. 16-Z, Flyover Bridge, Bhayander Wagle Industrial Estate, (E), Thane-401105. Thane West-400604. Pan No. Acmpv8532C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. M.N. Vaishanv, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/05/2019

…ced with the said reply of the assessee for the reason that those parties have admitted before the Sale Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that they had not made any sales or purchase transaction. The AO relying on the decision in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj), estimated the profit @ 12.5% on disputed purchases of Rs.91,20,342/- and thereby brought to tax Rs.11,40,043/-. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and confirmed the disallowance of Rs.11,40,043/-. Shri Bhavin V. Vora 3 3. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in (i) The Pr. CIT-17…

Bharav Tube (India), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumars.A. No. 238/Mum/2019 (Arising In Ita No.3929/Mum/2018, Ay.2009-10) Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Bhairav Tube (India), The Income Tax Officer-19(1)(2), C/O. M/S. Nakoda Metal Mumbai Vs. Industries, Room No. 101, 1St Floor, Lakdawala Saphire Centre, 4Th Kumbharwada Lane, Mumbai [Pan : Aaeft1198E] (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Bhairav Tube (India), The Income Tax Officer-19(1)(2), C/O. M/S. Nakoda Metal Mumbai Vs. Industries, Room No. 101, 1St Floor, Lakdawala Saphire Centre, 4Th Kumbharwada Lane, Mumbai [Pan : Aaeft1198E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…of assessee, sustained the addition and dismissed the appeal of assessee by sustaining the addition by holding that little higher addition of 15% was made as against 12.5% in the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth [356 ITR 451] (Gujarat). 5. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that the assessee is undoubtedly a beneficiary of hawala purchase entries to the tune of Rs.3,40,69,263/-. Though, the assessee has filed various details in the form of purchase invoices, PAN details of the suppliers however notices issued by the Ass…

Jethmal Bansraj Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Jethmal Bansraj Jain, Ito-19(2)(1), Shop No. 1, R.K. Wadi, V.P. Matrumandir, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Road, 2Ndparsiwada Lane, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai-400004. Pan No. Aaapj8298D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria, Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/05/2019

…sessee had provided stock statement and entries of the said purchases, the AO came to a finding that the assessee must have purchased from open market from some parties best known to him. Thereafter relying on the decision in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) and M/s Bholanath Poly Fab P. Ltd. 355 ITR 290, the AO estimated the profit @ Shri Jethmal Bansraj Jain 12.5% on the said amount of Rs.42,85,811/- and thus made a disallowance of Rs.5,35,726/-. 4. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and confirmed the disallowance of Rs.5,35,726/-. 5. The Ld. DR supports the or…

Shri Haresh Jayantilal Parekh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Haresh Jayantilal Income Tax Officer- Parekh, Dev Corporation, Vs. 19(1)(5), Matru Mandir, Room No. 54, 3Rd Floor, Mumbai-400007. 110, Khoja Building Kila Street, Gulal Wadi, Mumbai-400004 Pan No. Anwpp7416L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Haresh J. Parekh, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 24/05/2019

…details furnished by the assessee and relying on the findings of the Investigation conducted by the Sales Tax Department, estimated the profit @ 12.5% on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs.78,76,704/- by relying on the decision in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj). The disallowance made by the AO comes to Rs.9,84,588/-. 3. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and confirmed the disallowance of Rs.9,84,588/-. 4. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the appellant is engaged in the business of reseller and supplier of iron and steel etc. and he had submitte…