CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Priyal Trading Company, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 17(2)(5, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Priyal Trading Company, The Income Tax Officer 17(2)5, Ground Floor, Datar Niwas, Aaykar Bhavan, 87, Perin Nariman Street, Fort, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400001 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aahfp8240Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Neha Paranjpe Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2018

…ctually delivered to the assessee. Hence, we agree with the Ld. CIT (A) that the assessee has failed to establish the genuineness of the purchases shown made from the aforesaid nine parties. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) has held that in the case of bogus purchases it is necessary to ascertain the fact as to whether purchases were not made at all or purchases were made but from grey market. Once it is established that the purchases were actually made, although not from the parties mentioned in the books of account of the assessee, then only profit 5 Asse…

P.S.Engineers and Fabricators, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Thane

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S P.S. Engineers & - The Acit- Circle-3, Fabricators, 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Shop No. 9, Kamna Chs No. 1, Road No. 16Z, Sk Bole Road, Prabhadevi, Vs. Wagale Ind. Estate, Mumbai - 400028 Thane (W) - 400604 Pan: Aabfp4086A

…ding VAT and other taxis applicable during the relevant period. So far as the addition is concerned, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has upheld the decision of the ITAT and sustained the addition 12.5% of the total bogus purchases in the case of Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451(Guj) holding that only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. 8. So, following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the aforesaid cases, we modify the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restrict the addition to 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases i…

Alok Goenka, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 17(1)(1) Formerly Income Tax Officer Ward-13(1)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Alok Goenka, The Ito 17(1)(1), 9-A, 105/06, (Formerly Ito Ward – 13(1)(2), Whispering Palms, Xxclusive, Aayakar Bhavan, Lokhandawala Township, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Kondivali (East), Mumbai – 400101 Pan: Aadpg2843C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah (Ar) Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2018

…e tax on the profit element embedded in the purchases in question. Keeping in view, the nature of the business of the assessee, we hold that addition 100% of the total bogus purchases is not justified. 9. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in CIT vs. Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 451(Guj) has upheld the decision of the ITAT 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. Hence, applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the aforesaid case, we modify the order of the Ld.CIT (A) and restrict t…

Glow Metal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-26(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Glow Metal, The Ito 26(1)(5), A-5, Nandjyot Industrial Estate, Pratykshakar Bhavan, Saki Naka, Andheri-Kurla Road, C-10, Room No. 506, Mumbai - 400072 Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Pan: Aaafg3661K Mumbai - 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M. Subramanian (Ar) Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2018

…ties, rather the evidence on record suggest that the assessee had purchased the goods/ material from the parties other than the parties mentioned in the books of account. As has been held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) in the case of bogus purchases it is necessary to ascertain the fact as to whether purchases were not made at all or purchases were made but from grey market. Once it is established that the purchases were actually made then only profit embedded in the same could be added in the income of the assessee. The Hon’ble High Court accordingly uph…

Vaishali Prakash Muni, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 27(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

…tion entries provided by some of the MVAT dealers who were indulging in issuing bogus sale/purchase bills, which was investigated and kept on the public domain by the Sales Tax Department. The AO relying on the case of CIT Vs Simit P. Sheth [2013] reported in 356 ITR 451 (Guj.) and also considering the fact that purchases are recorded in the books of account, profit element embedded in such purchases was taken as the profit earned from purchases shown 8 ITA No.378-380/Mum/2018 Vaishali Prakash Muni to have been made from the hawala parties and estimated the profit @12.5% of the total non genuine purchases and ad…

Ion Exchange Waterleau Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Ion Exchange Waterleau Ltd Ito-6(3)(2), Ion House, 4Th Floor, Dr. E. Room No.503, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Moses Road, Mahalakshmi, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400011 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabci4403P "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri R.R.V.Raghavan राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai-Dr

…, order dated 16/01/2017. 18 Ion Exchange Waterleau Ltd. 2.10 In such type of cases, broadly, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as this Tribunal has followed the decisions from Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj.), CIT vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 498 (Guj.), CIT vs Bhola Nath Poly Fab. (P.) Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) and various other decisions of the Tribunal and the decision of M/s Nikunj Eximp(supra) from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, wherein, the aggregate disallowance was restricted to 12.5%. Admittedly, t…

Shivram Bholanath Shukla, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 26(3)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sh. Sivram B. Shukla, The Ito 26(3)(2), (Proprietor Of Sharp Rubber), Room No. 508, 5Th Floor, 1, Lal Mohammed Compound, C-11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Khairani Road, Andheri (East), Vs. B.K.C., Bandra (W), Mumbai - 400072 Mumbai - 400051 Pan: Ammps1931Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish J Sheth (Ar) Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 18/04/2018

…mbedded in the purchases in question. However, in view of the nature of the business of the assessee, we are of the opinion that the addition of 25% of the total bogus purchases is on the higher side. 14. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in CIT vs. Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 451(Guj) has upheld the decision of the ITAT and sustained the addition 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases holding that only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. Hence, in the light of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the aforesaid case, we modify the order of the Ld.CI…

ACIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Technotrade Impex India P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

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

…nt Order as bogus and non-genuine. 6. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) on examination of the submissions, evidences furnished before the Assessing Officer as well as before him and guided by the ratio of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] held that when the total sales are accepted by the Assessing Officer then the entire purchases cannot be added to the income of the assessee. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court he held that only the fair profit ratio would be added back to the income of the assessee. Further Ld.CIT(A) also stated that similar ba…

ACIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Technotrade Impex India P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

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

…nt Order as bogus and non-genuine. 6. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) on examination of the submissions, evidences furnished before the Assessing Officer as well as before him and guided by the ratio of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] held that when the total sales are accepted by the Assessing Officer then the entire purchases cannot be added to the income of the assessee. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court he held that only the fair profit ratio would be added back to the income of the assessee. Further Ld.CIT(A) also stated that similar ba…

Shree Vighanahar Chemicals Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

…f hearing and accordingly, the rival counsels were heard on the merits of the dispute. 6. At the time of hearing, the learned representative pointed out that following the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat), the entire purchases may not be considered for addition and only a percentage thereof be added to the returned income. It was emphasised that assessee has indeed used the material purchased in its consumption inasmuch as the sale of its products have not been doubted. Therefore, the entire amount of purchases could not be treated as un…

Jitendra M Kitavat, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result,appeals filed by the AO are rejected and the appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7049 & 7050/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ays: 2009-10 & 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan: Aabpk9960C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील संसंसंसं././././I.T.A./7099 & 7102/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.S: 2009-10 & 2007-08 अपील अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

…T(A) also accepted the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing certain percentage of impugned purchases, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] and CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and accordingly he estimated the profit element in the purchases at 12.5% for all the Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2013-14. 6. Before us the Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee is into trading and export of diamonds and the disallowances were made only based on the admission of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain in the course of search and s…

Shantivijay Jeweles Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

…the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (372 ITR 619).He further held that restricting the addition to 12.5% of the said purchases was reasonable.He relied on the Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of Simit P Sheth (356 ITR 451)in this regard.Thus, he confirmed the addition of Rs. 1,75,04, 222/- being 12.5% of Rs. 14,00,33,775/- and deleted the balance of Rs. 12,25,29,553/-. 4.Aggrieved with the said decision of CIT (A),the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal with regard to bogus purchases.While deciding the appeal the Tribunal restored back the issue of bogus pur…

Asst CIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Prashant Projects Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee as well revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4621/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Acit 15(2)(2) Prashant Projects Ltd., R.No. 403, 4 T H Floor, R.No. 406-408, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. 57, V. M.K. Road, Hermes Atrium, Mumbai 400020 Sector-11, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400614 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabci0639P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

…on bogus purchase despite the fact that the parties were found to be Hawala operator/Bogus billers". 4. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P Sheth (356 ITR 451) even though the fact of this case are different from that relied upon and hence the decision is not applicable in this case." 5. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made on disallowance of payment of tender fees of Rs. 212055/- and admitted additional evidence in contraventions of Rule 4…

ITO 12(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Mehta Infocom P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am The Income Tax Officer, Ward Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. 12(3)(4), Room No. 147A, 1 St A/301, Atul Apartments, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aafcm2000E Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, A/301, Atul Apartments, Ward 12(3)(4), Room No. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 147A, 1St Floor, Aayakar Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM The Income Tax Officer, Ward Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. 12(3)(4), Room No. 147A, 1 st A/301, Atul Apartments, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAFCM2000E Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, A/301, Atul Apartments, Ward 12(3)(4), Room No. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 147A, 1st Floor, Aayakar Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by : V Justin, DR Assessee by : Rajesh Chamaria, AR Date of heari…

Mehta Infocom P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 12(3)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am The Income Tax Officer, Ward Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. 12(3)(4), Room No. 147A, 1 St A/301, Atul Apartments, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aafcm2000E Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, A/301, Atul Apartments, Ward 12(3)(4), Room No. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 147A, 1St Floor, Aayakar Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM The Income Tax Officer, Ward Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. 12(3)(4), Room No. 147A, 1 st A/301, Atul Apartments, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAFCM2000E Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, A/301, Atul Apartments, Ward 12(3)(4), Room No. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 147A, 1st Floor, Aayakar Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by : V Justin, DR Assessee by : Rajesh Chamaria, AR Date of heari…

ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Jitendra Madanlal Kitawat (HUF), Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the AO is rejected and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7047/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat (Huf) Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan:Assesseebpk 9960 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7100/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat(Huf) Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

…T(A) also accepted the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing certain percentage of impugned purchases, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. [355 ITR 290] and CIT v. Simit P. Seth [356 ITR 451] and accordingly he estimated the profit element in the purchases at 12.5% for all the Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2013-14. 6. Before us the Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee is into trading and export of diamonds and the disallowances were made only based on the admission of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain in the course of search and s…

Asst CIT 32(3), Mumbai vs. Shayona Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed and also the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income M/S Shayona Corporation Tax -32(3), Ho: 3/13, Ruchi Apartment, Room No. 108, 1St Floor, Bldg Shimpoli Roas, Borivali No. C-11, Pratyakshakar West, Mumbai-400 092 Vs. Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aayfs7315L Co No. 243/Mum/2017 (Arising In Ita No. 5276/Mum/20115 For A.Y. 2011-12)

…ase. We find from the facts of the case that that admittedly these are bogus purchases and Tribunal is consistently taking up bogus purchases by applying profit rate estimating the income. Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat) considered this issue and applied the profit rate at the rate of 12.5%. Taking a clue from Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has reasonably estimated 10% of the bogus purchases and hence, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and the same is confirmed. The issue of Revenues appeal is dismissed. 6. Com…

Noble Corporation, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 33(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

…the Assessing Officer took the view that the profit element embedded in such purchases should alone be brought to tax. In this regard, the Assessing Officer placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451). Accordingly, the Assessing Officer estimated the profit on such purchases at 12.5% and accordingly made addition of ` 6,94,490/- in A.Y. 2009-10 and ` 7,95,828/- in A.Y. 2010-11. 4. The assessee carried the matter by filing appeals before the learned CIT(A) but could not succeed. Hence, the assessee has filed these appeals before the Tribunal.…

Chirag Rajendra Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 24(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4086 To 4088/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Mr. Chirag Rajendra Shah Ito, Ward 24(1)(4), 502, 5Th Floor, C-13, D-305, Siddhi Vinayak Tower, बनाम/ Off Tank Road, Orlem, Malad, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-64 Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afxps 7904 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. K. Sharma & Ms. Taneshka Sharma ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar

…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.) we hold that a disallowance of 12.5% of the bogus purchase would meet the end of justice. Accordingly, we modify the order's of authorities below and direct that the disallowance in this case should be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchase. We also note here that before the Assessing Officer the assessee has Mr. Chirag Rajendra Shah…

Simplex Metal & Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.222/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Simplex Metal & Alloys Ito-19(3)(3) Shop No. 25, Ground Floor, Room No. 202, Matru Mandir, बनाम/ Harharwala Building, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 Vs. Ardeshir Dady Street, S.V.P. Road, Near Alankar Cinema, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfs 5871 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 28.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 02.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 10.10.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2010- 11. 2. The Issue Raised Relates To The Validity Of Reopening & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.13,78,911/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases.

…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's of authorities below and direct that the disallowance in this case should be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchase. 9 Simplex Metal & Alloys 16. In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly all…