CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Pramod S. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…the assessee could not prove the genuineness of purchases, these goods must have been purchased from the grey market at a lesser price to inflate the prices of goods. The AO further relying on the Gujarat High Court decisions of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) and CIT vs. Bholenath Poly Fab P. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guajarat) 3 proceeded to make an addition of profit @12.5% of the total purchases of Rs.1,66,70,967/- which comes to ₹ 20,83,870/-. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A). 4. The CIT(A) also confirmed the action of the AO by observing in Para 3.3. to 3.3.2 as unde…

Pushpak Auxichem P.Ltd, Thane vs. ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Pushpak Auxichem Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (3) Mohan Plaza, 1St Floor Wayle Nagar 241/B-2, Kasturi Plaza, 2Nd Floor, बिधम/ Khadak Pada, Manpada Road, Dombivali (East), Vs. Kalyan- 421301 Thane-421 201

…of our aforesaid observations, it can safely be concluded that the assessee by booking the purchases on the basis of bogus purchase bills had inflated its purchases. We find that the Hon’blle High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) after deliberating at length on the issue as regards the profit that would be involved in making of purchases by an assessee from the Open/grey market, had concluded that the same can safely be taken at 12.5% of the aggregate value of such bogus purchases. We thus, being of the considered view that the disallowance sustained by the CIT(A) t…

Ajay Radheshvam Kejriwal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1903/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Ajay Radheshyam Kejriwal Ito, Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai-C 13, 5Th Floor, 1-A-65, Manali Evershine Vs. Nagar, Malad (West), Bandra. Mumbai-400064. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanpk4820F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri N. Hemalatha Assessee By: Shri Neelam C. Jadhav सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28.06.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06.07.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 30.09.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-41 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Ay. 2010- 11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “(On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Law Applicable Thereto, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding The Validity Of The Re- Opening Of Assessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Law Applicable Thereto, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Treating The Purchase From Various

…s. Therefore, it is held that the appellant has failed to prove that the goods were based from the aforesaid parties. 5.1 On the issue of bogus purchase, decisions like Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 58 taxmann,com 44 (Guj) , CIT vs. Simit P, Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.) support disallowance of certain percentage of purchase price. The disallowance is justified because the exact source of goods or exact amount of inflation is known to the assessee only. Further, without a much bigger benefit ITA. No.1903/M/18 A.Y.2010-11 than the normal GP ratio, no prudent person will enter into transactions of purchasi…

Abhijit Hansu Kumar Pandey, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Abhijit Hansu Kumar Pandey, The Income Tax Officer, 35, Shiv Shankar Industrial Estate, Ward-2(1), B.P. Road, Bhayander (E)-401105 Ashar It Park, B-25, 6Th Floor, Vs. Road No. 16-Z, Pan: Ajppp8142G Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (West) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/07/2018

…plicable during the relevant period. Under these circumstances, the question arises as to whether 100% addition is justified or it should be restricted to 12.5% as urged by the assessee in its appeal. 8. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in CIT vs. Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 451(Guj) upheld the decision of the Tribunal and sustained the addition12.5% of the total bogus purchases holding that only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. Hence, following the principles law laid down by the Hon’ble High Gujarat High Court, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee and restrict the…

Indigo Metalooys P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Indigo Metalloys P. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-5(2)(1) Office No. 2,3,4 & 5 Mumbai बिधम/ Shivneri Bldg, Vs. Mughbhat Lane, Girgaon, Mumbai- 400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabci8026L (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Ashok J. Patil, A.R प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Saurabh Deshpande, D.R

…purchases as against the value for which the goods were actually procured from the open/grey market. On the basis of his aforesaid observations, the A.O relying on the judgement of the Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) made an addition of 12.5% of the total purchases of Rs.3,30,42,768/- and added an amount of Rs.41,30,346/- to the income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) after deliberating on the facts of the case in the backdrop of the contentions advanced by the assessee before him, wa…

Vaibhav Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. Ast CIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

…a (2017) 87 taxmann.com 156 (Mumbai-Trib). 7.1 The Ld. counsel also filed another P/B containing the report of the task group for a diamond sector to make India an ‘International Trading Hub for Rough Diamonds’ and the decision in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 619 (Bom), DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil (ITA No. 6727/Mum/2012) (ITAT ‘D’ Bench Mumbai), M/s Geolife Organics v. ACIT (ITA No. 3699/Mum/2016) (ITAT ‘F’ Bench Mumbai). 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR relies on the decision in N.K. Proteins Ltd. v. DCIT (2017-TIOL-23-SC-IT), Surjeet Singh…

Vaibhav Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

…a (2017) 87 taxmann.com 156 (Mumbai-Trib). 7.1 The Ld. counsel also filed another P/B containing the report of the task group for a diamond sector to make India an ‘International Trading Hub for Rough Diamonds’ and the decision in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 619 (Bom), DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil (ITA No. 6727/Mum/2012) (ITAT ‘D’ Bench Mumbai), M/s Geolife Organics v. ACIT (ITA No. 3699/Mum/2016) (ITAT ‘F’ Bench Mumbai). 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR relies on the decision in N.K. Proteins Ltd. v. DCIT (2017-TIOL-23-SC-IT), Surjeet Singh…

DCIT Cen Cir 2(3), Mumbai vs. Vaibhav D Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

…a (2017) 87 taxmann.com 156 (Mumbai-Trib). 7.1 The Ld. counsel also filed another P/B containing the report of the task group for a diamond sector to make India an ‘International Trading Hub for Rough Diamonds’ and the decision in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 619 (Bom), DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil (ITA No. 6727/Mum/2012) (ITAT ‘D’ Bench Mumbai), M/s Geolife Organics v. ACIT (ITA No. 3699/Mum/2016) (ITAT ‘F’ Bench Mumbai). 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR relies on the decision in N.K. Proteins Ltd. v. DCIT (2017-TIOL-23-SC-IT), Surjeet Singh…

DCIT Cen Cir 2(3), Mumbai vs. Vaibhav D Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

…a (2017) 87 taxmann.com 156 (Mumbai-Trib). 7.1 The Ld. counsel also filed another P/B containing the report of the task group for a diamond sector to make India an ‘International Trading Hub for Rough Diamonds’ and the decision in CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 619 (Bom), DCIT v. Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil (ITA No. 6727/Mum/2012) (ITAT ‘D’ Bench Mumbai), M/s Geolife Organics v. ACIT (ITA No. 3699/Mum/2016) (ITAT ‘F’ Bench Mumbai). 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR relies on the decision in N.K. Proteins Ltd. v. DCIT (2017-TIOL-23-SC-IT), Surjeet Singh…

Manmal Metal Syndicate, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

…Under these circumstances the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly sustained the addition of 9% of the total amount of bogus purchases by following the various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451. In the said case, the Hon’ble High Court has upheld the decision of the Tribunal and sustained the addition 12.5% of the total bogus purchases holding that only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. Since, the Ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition by following the principles law laid down by the Hon’bl…

Prakash B. Thakur, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

…the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the transactions, AO made addition of 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases to the income of the assessee by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 and M/s Bholenath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290, holding the purchases in question bogus. 2.1 Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee challenged the same before the Ld. CIT (A). The Ld. CIT (A) after hearing the assessee dismissed the appeal and confirmed the addition made by AO holding the addition @ 12.5% is reasonable in terms of the l…

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bright Power Projects (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of assessee is allowed in part

…17.74% on the alleged purchases of Rs.1,11,50,980/- and added the same in assessee’s income. 5. By the impugned order, CIT(A) has upheld the reopening and estimated profit of 12.5% by relying on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in case of Simit P Sheth 256 ITR 451. Against the above order of CIT(A), both assessee and Revenue are in appeal before us. 6. It was argued by learned AR that assessee has filed all the documentary evidence before the lower authorities to prove the genuineness of purchases. He further contended that gross profit shown by the assessee during the year was 17.74%, therefore, making fu…

Mutta Steelage Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 5(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Mutta Steelage Pvt. Ltd., The Ito-5(2)(3), Ridhi Apartment, Shop No. 7, Room No. 566, 5Th Floor, 10Th Khetwadi Back Road, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400004 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aafcm1258G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 14/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/06/2018

…tablish the genuineness of the transaction asked the assessee to produce the parties. But the assessee failed to produce the parties before the AO. Accordingly, the AO relying on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) made addition of 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases to the income of the assessee. The assessee aggrieved by the assessment order challenged the same before the CIT (A). The Ld. CIT (A) after hearing the assessee confirmed the addition of 12.5% made by the AO. Against the said order the assessee in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. T…

Hitesh P. Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-2010

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Hitesh P. Jain, The Ito-19(1)(5), Krishvi Heights, 10Th Floor, Matru Mandir, Room No. 215, Flat No. 1001, V.P. Road, Tardeo Road, Near Prarthna Samaj, Vs. Mumbai - 400007 Mumbai-400004 Pan: Aeipj6186Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 14/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/06/2018

…addition is concerned, since the AO has not rejected the sales, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition of 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases, in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj),The Ld. 4 Assessment Year: 2009-10 CIT(A) has confirmed the addition on the ground that the AO has made the addition taking in to consideration the VAT evaded and profit earned by the assessee by purchasing the material in grey market and obtaining bogus entries from the aforesaid ‘hawala dealers’ to justify the purchases so made. Henc…

ITO 1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Dosti Realty Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

…t have made purchases from grey market and obtained these bogus bills to save on account of VAT and purchases from grey market are made at a lower rate. Hence, we following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj), wherein in similar 6 circumstances has applied profit rate of 12.5%, we apply the profit rate at 12.5% of the bogus purchases. We direct the AO to recompute the disallowance at the rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases only. This issue of Revenue’s appeals is partly allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed. Order…

Lokesh H Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhta No.3632 To 3634/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12) Lokesh H. Jain Ito-14(3)(2) Prop. M/S Sagar Cables, Earnest House, Nariman Point Room No. 29, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-20. Amrut Nivas, 165 Lohar Chawl, Next To T Building, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Abypj4504D Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Prakash Jotwani- Advocate Respondent By : Miss Pooja Swaroop (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income –Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER TA No.3632 to 3634/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2011-12) Lokesh H. Jain ITO-14(3)(2) Prop. M/s Sagar Cables, Earnest House, Nariman Point Room No. 29, 2nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-20. Amrut Nivas, 165 Lohar Chawl, next to T Building, Mumbai-400002. PAN: ABYPJ4504D Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Prakash Jotwani- Advocate Respondent by : Miss Pooja Swaroop (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 11.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 11.06.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) of Incom…

Franco -Indian Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-2(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

…ister concern in the case of DCIT vs. Laboratories Griffon Pvt. Ltd. dtd. 11.04.2018 for AY 2011-12, wherein Tribunal has restricted the disallowance at 30% of the bogus purchase. Further, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) in similar circumstances has applied profit rate of 12.5%. But in the present case the issue is covered by assessee’s sister concern’s case of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and hence, according to us profit rate of 30% will meet the end of justice. This issue of assessee’s appeals is partly allowed. 9. In the result, these three appea…

Franco Indian Pharmaceutical P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

…ister concern in the case of DCIT vs. Laboratories Griffon Pvt. Ltd. dtd. 11.04.2018 for AY 2011-12, wherein Tribunal has restricted the disallowance at 30% of the bogus purchase. Further, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) in similar circumstances has applied profit rate of 12.5%. But in the present case the issue is covered by assessee’s sister concern’s case of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and hence, according to us profit rate of 30% will meet the end of justice. This issue of assessee’s appeals is partly allowed. 9. In the result, these three appea…

Franco Indian Pharmaceutical P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 6(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

…ister concern in the case of DCIT vs. Laboratories Griffon Pvt. Ltd. dtd. 11.04.2018 for AY 2011-12, wherein Tribunal has restricted the disallowance at 30% of the bogus purchase. Further, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) in similar circumstances has applied profit rate of 12.5%. But in the present case the issue is covered by assessee’s sister concern’s case of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and hence, according to us profit rate of 30% will meet the end of justice. This issue of assessee’s appeals is partly allowed. 9. In the result, these three appea…

Pankaj Kishor Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 966/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Pankaj Kishor Shah Ito-25(2)(2), बनाम/ 7/8, Neel Kamal, Pratyakshakar Bhawan, Roshan Nagar, Borivali (W), Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 092 Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Acpps 1076 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha N. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 05.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 21.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 30.12.2016 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: I. 1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal) - 44 ("The Cit (A)") Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') Without Affording The Appellant A Proper Opportunity Of Cross Examination.

…ealings in the grey market give the assessee various savings at the expense of the Exchequer. Hence, on the overall consideration of facts and circumstances and following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.) I hold that a disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchase would meet the end of justice. Accordingly, I modify the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and direct that the disallowance in this case should be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchase. 9 Shri Pankaj Kishor Shah 17. In the result, this appeal filed by the…