CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Hindustan Construction Corporation, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(2), Navi Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Hindustan Construction The Dy. Commissioner Of Corporation Income Tax-27(1), 208, Mahinder Chambers, 4Th Floor, Tower-6, Vashi Vs. Opp. Dukes Co., W.T. Patil Railway Station, Navi Marg, Chembur, Mumbai-400 Mumbai-400704 704 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aadfh4209D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM Hindustan Construction The Dy. Commissioner of Corporation Income Tax-27(1), 208, Mahinder Chambers, 4th Floor, Tower-6, Vashi Vs. Opp. Dukes Co., W.T. Patil Railway Station, Navi Marg, Chembur, Mumbai-400 Mumbai-400704 704 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AADFH4209D Assessee by : A.K. Ghosh, AR Revenue by : M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR Date of hearing: 21-02-2018 Date of pronouncement : 28-02-2018 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner…

DCIT CC 3(1) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Oswal & Associates, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3197 &3198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates बनाम/ Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3284 &3285/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers बनाम/ Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines 1924, 19Th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Prateek Jain,Ld.Ar Revenue By : Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld. Dr

…ITA Nos.3197-98,3284-85/Mum/2017 Oswal & Associates Assessment Years- 2011-12 & 2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एच” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी महावीर िसंह,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3197 &3198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates बनाम/ Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAAFO-0056-E (अपील…

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jaimin Jewellery Exports P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3195/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/S Jaimin Jewellery Exports, Vs. The Acit-19(2), Mumbai 52, Marble Arch, G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfj2140C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3194/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Jaimin Jewellery Exports Vs. The Acit-5(2)(1), Mumbai Pvt. Ltd., 52, Marble Arch, G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj9820F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3203/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S Jaimin Jewellery Exports Tax, Circle 5(2)(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 571, Aayakar Bhavan, C/O Mehta Family Trust, M.K. Road, 52, Marble Arch, Mumbai - 400020 G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj9820F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘एल, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L”, BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री राजेन्द्र, लेखा सदस्य, एवुं , राम लाल नेगी न्यायिक सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM आिकर अपील सं./ITA No. 3195/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/s Jaimin Jewellery Exports, Vs. The ACIT-19(2), Mumbai 52, Marble Arch, G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACFJ2140C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आिकर अपील सं./ITA No. 3194/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Jaimin J…

Oswal & Associates, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3197 &3198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates बनाम/ Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3284 &3285/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers बनाम/ Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines 1924, 19Th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafo-0056-F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Prateek Jain,Ld.Ar Revenue By : Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld. Dr

…ITA Nos.3197-98,3284-85/Mum/2017 Oswal & Associates Assessment Years- 2011-12 & 2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एच” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी महावीर िसंह,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3197 &3198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Oswal & Associates बनाम/ Income-Tax 205, Marine Chambers Central Circle 3(1) 43, New Marine Lines Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAAFO-0056-E (अपील…

Jaimin Jewellery Exports, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3195/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/S Jaimin Jewellery Exports, Vs. The Acit-19(2), Mumbai 52, Marble Arch, G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfj2140C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3194/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Jaimin Jewellery Exports Vs. The Acit-5(2)(1), Mumbai Pvt. Ltd., 52, Marble Arch, G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj9820F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3203/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S Jaimin Jewellery Exports Tax, Circle 5(2)(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 571, Aayakar Bhavan, C/O Mehta Family Trust, M.K. Road, 52, Marble Arch, Mumbai - 400020 G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj9820F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘एल, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “L”, BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री राजेन्द्र, लेखा सदस्य, एवुं , राम लाल नेगी न्यायिक सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM आिकर अपील सं./ITA No. 3195/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/s Jaimin Jewellery Exports, Vs. The ACIT-19(2), Mumbai 52, Marble Arch, G Dashukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai – 400026 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACFJ2140C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आिकर अपील सं./ITA No. 3194/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Jaimin J…

Empeef Chemicals P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu: A.Y : 2010-11

…principle, affirmed the decision of the Assessing Officer, but restricted the addition to 30% of the amount of purchases, which came to Rs.5,73,834/- following, inter-alia, the ratio of the judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat). Not being satisfied with the order of the CIT(A), assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the learned representative for the assessee referred to the decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 77/Mum/2017 dated 30.06.2017 in assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2009-10, wherein in a similar situation,…

Naresh P. Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 18(2)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

…pted, the Assessing Officer took the view that the profit embedded in the alleged bogus purchase is required to be assessed in the income tax purpose. Accordingly, by following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) the Assessing Officer took the view that the profit may be estimated at 12.5%. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer computed the addition at 12.5% of Rs. 99.48 lakhs, which worked out to Rs. 12.43 lakhs. The Assessing Officer added the same to the total income returned by the assessee. The learned CIT(A) also confirmed the same and hence the asses…

Prabhat Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO Cir 27(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

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

…be considered in the interest of ITA. No.532/M/17 798/M/17 A.Y. 2011-12 justice. In support of this contention the Ld. Representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon in law settled in Vijay Protein Vs. CIT 58 ITT 458 (Ahd) and CIT Vs. Simit P Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Gujrat High Court). It is also argued that the non service of notice in view of provision u/s 133(6) of the Act nowhere effect the claim of the assessee when the claim of the assessee has duly been proved on record by adducing sufficient evidence on record. In support of this contention the Ld. Representative of the assessee has placed reliance…

Tasc Chemicals P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 7(3)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Tasc Chemical - The Income Tax Officer, Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(3)(3), C-502, Kailash Esplande, Mumbai Lbs Marg, Ghatkoper, Vs. Mumbai - 400086 Pan: Aaact3152N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal D. Shah (Ar) Revenue By : Shri V. Justin (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 06/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2018

…2 ITR 619 (Bom) has held that merely because the suppliers had not appeared before the Assessing Officer or the CIT (A) one could not conclude that the purchases were not made by the respondent/assessee. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Simit P. Seth 356 ITR 451(Guj) has upheld 5 Assessment Year: 2009-10 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. Hence, in our considered view, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is not based on the law laid down by the Hon…

Sanjay H. Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-13(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result the ground No

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Accoutant Member & Shri Pawan Singh

…nce, keeping in view of any possibility of the revenue leakage in the present case, the disallowance of purchases of steel at 5% of the purchases would meet the end of justice. Similar view was taken by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Simith P Seth [2013(356 ITR 451)] and by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hariram Bhambani ITA No 313 of 2013. 8. Thus, respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Simit P Seth supra and by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hariram Bhambani (supra), the disallowance of cost of purchases of steel is restricted to 5% of the purchases. The assessing offi…

Vama International, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…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…

Vama International, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…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…

Vama International, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…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…

Apex Softcel (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…ncy as well as of taxation laws that profit from business cannot be ascertained without deducting cost of purchase from sales. Estimation of profit ranging from 12.5% to 15% has been upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Simit P Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). We find that Mumbai Tribunal, in the case of Madhukant B Gandhi in ITA No.1950/M/09, considering the various judgments of various High Courts has held that in view of the fact that it has been amply established that purchase records in books of account from these 5 M/s. Apex Softcel (India) Pvt. Ltd. parties were bogus which suppress to…

Naginbhai Khimji Choudhary, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both, the appeals of assessee are party allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…the returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in para 6.2 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: - “6.2 In this back drop of addition made by the AO and also various submission placed by the appellant, I do not find any valid reason to interfere with the addition @ 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases, and the addition made by the AO on this issue is upheld. All the above grounds are on the issue of this additi…

Naginbhai Khimji Choudhary, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 10(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both, the appeals of assessee are party allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

…the returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the AO by observing in para 6.2 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: - “6.2 In this back drop of addition made by the AO and also various submission placed by the appellant, I do not find any valid reason to interfere with the addition @ 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases, and the addition made by the AO on this issue is upheld. All the above grounds are on the issue of this additi…

Poly Impex, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer 18 (3) (3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Poly Impex, The Income Tax Officer, 102/A, Shri Krupa Chs. Ltd., बनाम/ Ward-18(3)(3), Station Road, Bhayander (East), Earnest House, 5Th Floor, Vs. Thane – 401 105 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaifp 0795 R

…urchases (SLP (C) No.s 769 of 2017, order dated 16/01/2017. 4.9. 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, there c…

Neha Steels, Thane vs. ITO Ward, 1(3), Kalyan

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramt Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, M/S. Neha Steels, Ward-1(3), Kalyan. H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Neha Steels, Income Tax Officer, H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Ward-1(3), Kalyan. Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D

…rchases (SLP (C) No.s 769 of 2017, order dated 16/01/2017. 5.9. 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, there c…

ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan vs. Neha Steels, Thane

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramt Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, M/S. Neha Steels, Ward-1(3), Kalyan. H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Neha Steels, Income Tax Officer, H.No. 24, Ganesh Society, बनाम/ Ward-1(3), Kalyan. Behind Mseb, Kalyan Road, Vs. Bhiwandi, Dist. – Thane. (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaffn 9968 D

…rchases (SLP (C) No.s 769 of 2017, order dated 16/01/2017. 5.9. 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, there c…