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 367,154 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

Mukesh Radhyesham Goyal, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 7276/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju (Sr.DR)
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘SMC’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member ITA No.7276/Mum/2016 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Shri Radhyesham Goyal The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 510 Cotton Exchange, Kalbadevi Road Ward 18(2)(2) Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai. Vs. PAN : AABPG3681L. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Appellant by : --- None --- ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju (Sr.DR) सुनवाई क" तार"ख / घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 16.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 03.07.2017 आदेश / O R D E R T…

Chandrakant T. Goradia, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1704/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm Chandrakant T. Goradia Income Tax Officer 502 Ruby Tower, Dadabhai X Rd Ward No. 25(2)(2) No. 3, Ville Parle (W) Vs. C-10 R. No. 507 Mumbai-50 Pratyakshakar Bhavan Bkc 2 Pan No. Aeipg6213P Mumbai-50 Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri Dharmesh Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By .. Shri Purushottam Kumar, Dr .. Date Of Hearing 24-05-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 07-06-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147

…as not doubted the sales and it is not possible to effect sales without purchase but the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO after considering the various case laws including the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs. Smith P Seth 365 ITR 451(Guj) and he confirmed the addition by observing in Para 7.4. as under: - “7.4 In this case too, the motive behind obtaining bogus bills thus, appears to be inflation of purchase so as to suppress true profits. This is a case where the purchases themselves are not bogus but the purchase parties shown in books are. Therefore, what needed to be tax…

Narendra Choudhary, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1639/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm Narendra Choudhary Income Tax Officer Shop No. 17 Shre Govardhan Ward No. 19(2)(4) Chs Ltd. 212/218 Khetwadi Rd, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-04 Pan No.Aacpc3210E Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Purushottam Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 24-05-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 07-06-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM Narendra Choudhary Income Tax Officer Shop No. 17 Shre Govardhan Ward No. 19(2)(4) CHS Ltd. 212/218 Khetwadi Rd, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-04 PAN No.AACPC3210E Appellant .. Respondent Assessee by .. Shri Vimal Punmiya, AR Revenue by .. Shri Purushottam Kumar, DR Date of hearing .. 24-05-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 07-06-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-29, Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-29/IT-429/ITO-19(2)(4)/16-17 dated 19-01-2017. The Assessment was framed by ITO…

ITO 32(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Hiren C Parekh, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objection is partly allowed and that of revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer-32(1)(5), Shri Hiren C Parekh, Room No.203, C-11, 2Nd Floor,, Prop M/S Asiatic Metals & Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Alloys, फनधभ/ Bandra-Kurla Complex, 402, Narmada Apartments, Vs. Bandra (E), Simpoli Road, Haridas Nagar, Mumbai-400051 Borivali (W), Mumbia-400092 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Cross-Objection No.17/Mum/2017 Arising Out Of Ita No.01/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Hiren C Parekh, Income Tax Officer-32(1)(5), Room No.203, C-11, 2Nd Floor,, Prop M/S Asiatic Metals & Alloys, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, फनधभ/ 402, Narmada Apartments, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Vs. Simpoli Road, Haridas Nagar, Bandra (E), Borivali (W), Mumbai-400051 Mumbia-400092 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms.Snehal R ShahFor Respondent: Shri M C Omi Ningshan
Section 133(6)Section 69C

…ssessee has also filed cross-objection challenging the order of ld. CIT(A) in sustenance of addition to the tune of 12% of the total bogus purchases which worked out to Rs.8,57,760/- and prayed that in view of the decision in the case of CIT V/s Simit P Seth (356 ITR 451) Gujarat High Court the addition should be restricted to 3,39,530/- on the ground that the assessee has already reflected GP margin of 7.25% and balance needs to be sustained and not at the rate of 12%. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has made total purchases of Rs.2,03,55,145/- and accordingly calle…

Kanchan Ferromet, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1552/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144rSection 148Section 234B

…have heard both the Counsel and perused the records. 6. The learned Counsel of the assessee pleaded that addition in this case be restricted to 12.5% of the bogus purchases as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P.Sheth [(2013) 38 Taxmann 385 (Guj.)]. 7. Per contra, learned Departmental Representative referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of N.K.Industries v. DCIT vide order dated 26.06.2016 wherein addition on account of bogus purchases were restricted to 25% by the ITAT. The Hon’ble High Court has upheld the addition of entire bogus purc…

ITO Ward - 3(1), Kalyan vs. Bakshish M. Malhotra, Kalyan

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2126/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain: (A.Y : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Beena Santosh &
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…r this reason, the CIT(A) took into consideration the gross profit and the net profit declared by the assessee during the year, which stood at 6.07% and 3.36% respectively, and also the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat) and proceeded to estimate the profit on such unproved purchases at 12.5%. Thus, the CIT(A) retained an addition of Rs.6,34,732/- and deleted the balance. Against such a decision, Revenue is in appeal contending that the entire amount of purchases ought to have been added to the total income because it was unproved. The assessee, on the…

DCIT Cir 29(3), Mumbai vs. SMC Sbk Jv, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3537/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Dcit Cir 29(3), Mumbai – Vs. Smc Sbk Jv 400 051 Shop No.2, Aakruti Elgance, 90 Feet Road Govanpada, Mulund (W), Mumbai – 400 080 Pan/Gir No. Ablfs7647H Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 48(5)

…ITR 274 (Guj) , the Hon'ble court had 5 SMC SBK JV upheld the action of the CIT(A) and ITAT in determining estimated "addition of25% of the purchases in cases involving bogus purchase. Very recently in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj), the Hon'ble High Court has given a finding that estimation of rate of profit must necessarily vary with the nature of business and no uniform yardstick could be adopted and finally confirmed the action of the ITAT in determining 12.5% of the bogus purchases as the profit embedded in such transactions. 6.8 The same ratio also has been appli…

Mafatlal Moolchand Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT 32(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 3905/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

…ported hereinabove to suppress its true profits. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as Gujarat Page 2 of 6 ITA No.3904/Mum/2015 & Mafatlal Moolchand Shah AYs:09-10,10-11) High Court decision in the case of Simit P. Sheth 92013) [365 ITR 451] (Guj), I hereby estimate, I hereby estimate the G.P. percentage at 12.5% being the possible profit out of the purchases made through non-genuine parties known as tainted purchases and therefore, I hereby make an addition of Rs. 46,05,331/- [12.5% of Rs. 3,68,42,648) as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C.” Aggrieved assessee preferred the appeal be…

Mafatlal Moolchand Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT 32(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 3904/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

…ported hereinabove to suppress its true profits. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as Gujarat Page 2 of 6 ITA No.3904/Mum/2015 & Mafatlal Moolchand Shah AYs:09-10,10-11) High Court decision in the case of Simit P. Sheth 92013) [365 ITR 451] (Guj), I hereby estimate, I hereby estimate the G.P. percentage at 12.5% being the possible profit out of the purchases made through non-genuine parties known as tainted purchases and therefore, I hereby make an addition of Rs. 46,05,331/- [12.5% of Rs. 3,68,42,648) as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C.” Aggrieved assessee preferred the appeal be…

Manish Kanji Patel, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result Departmental appeal ground No

ITA 7627/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

For Appellant: Shri MC Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…l 7 sales of the paper. Therefore, only profit element should be added he relied on various judgements which reads as under: Sr. No. Copy of Judgments Balaji Textile Industries P Ltd v Third Income Tax Officer [1994] 49 1 ITD 177 2 CIT v Simit P Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat) 3 CIT v Bholanath Poly Fab P Ltd [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Gujarat) 4 CIT v Sathynarayan P Rathi [2013]351 ITR150 (Gujarat) ITO v Maharashtra State Co-operative, Consumers' Federation 5 Ltd[2011]13taxmann.com 163 (Mumbai) 6 CIT v Hotline Electronics Ltd [2012] 18 taxmann.com 363 (Delhi) 8. We have heard the rival contention of both the partie…

ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Manish Kanji Patel, Mumbai

In the result Departmental appeal ground No

ITA 7300/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

For Appellant: Shri MC Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…l 7 sales of the paper. Therefore, only profit element should be added he relied on various judgements which reads as under: Sr. No. Copy of Judgments Balaji Textile Industries P Ltd v Third Income Tax Officer [1994] 49 1 ITD 177 2 CIT v Simit P Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat) 3 CIT v Bholanath Poly Fab P Ltd [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Gujarat) 4 CIT v Sathynarayan P Rathi [2013]351 ITR150 (Gujarat) ITO v Maharashtra State Co-operative, Consumers' Federation 5 Ltd[2011]13taxmann.com 163 (Mumbai) 6 CIT v Hotline Electronics Ltd [2012] 18 taxmann.com 363 (Delhi) 8. We have heard the rival contention of both the partie…

ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Manish Kanji Patel, Mumbai

In the result Departmental appeal ground No

ITA 7299/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

For Appellant: Shri MC Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…l 7 sales of the paper. Therefore, only profit element should be added he relied on various judgements which reads as under: Sr. No. Copy of Judgments Balaji Textile Industries P Ltd v Third Income Tax Officer [1994] 49 1 ITD 177 2 CIT v Simit P Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Gujarat) 3 CIT v Bholanath Poly Fab P Ltd [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Gujarat) 4 CIT v Sathynarayan P Rathi [2013]351 ITR150 (Gujarat) ITO v Maharashtra State Co-operative, Consumers' Federation 5 Ltd[2011]13taxmann.com 163 (Mumbai) 6 CIT v Hotline Electronics Ltd [2012] 18 taxmann.com 363 (Delhi) 8. We have heard the rival contention of both the partie…

Sion Steel, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 26(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7598/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannum/S. Sion Steels, A-159, Naik Nagar, Near Maharashtra- Weigh Bridge, Lbs Marg, Sion (W), Mumbai 400 022. Pan:Aabfs 7718L ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 26(3)(2), Pratyakshyakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra(E), Mumbai -400 051 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pravin N. ShahFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Kardam
Section 143(3)

…lso unsuccessful, against which assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before me, the limited plea raised by the assessee is to the effect that following the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth,356 ITR 451(Guj), what is sustainable is only the addition with regard to the element of profit in such purchases, and, therefore, the Ld.Representative for the assessee submitted that an addition equivalent to a profit rate of 12.50% of the impugned purchases be sustained. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative pointed out that assessee…

Geolife Organics, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 23(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of all the assessees are allowed in part

ITA 3699/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Geolife Organics Vs. Acit – 23(2), Mumbai- 301, Marathon Max, 400051 L.B.S.Marg, Opp. Nirmal Lifestyle, Mulund(W), Mumbai – 400 080 Pan/Gir No. Aahfg7722N Appellant) .. Respondent) Shri Vikram N. Chandan, Vs. Ito – 19(3)(5), Mumbai- Shop No.756/54, Nanubhai 400 007 Desai Road, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No. Acypc2583N Appellant) .. Respondent) Shri Jabarsingh B Daiya, Vs. Ito – 19(2)(1), Mumbai – R.No.16, 1St Floor, Mulji 400 007 Madhavji Building, 160, C.P.Tank Road, Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No. Ahypd4454E Appellant) .. Respondent) Shri Rajendra Nemichandji Vs. Ito – 19(3)(1), Mumbai – Chandan, 38, Ground Floor, 400 007 Alankar Building, 245/247, Khetwadi Lane, S.V.P. Road, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No. Aeypc6575L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Geolife Organics, Mumbai & Others

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…public domain by the Sales Tax Department. Assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT. Act, 1961 was completed by the Ld. AD on 09- 03-2015 determining the total income at Rs. 20,85,250/-. 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 to have been made from the eighteen parties and estimated the profit @12.5% of the total non genuine M/s. Geolife Organics, Mumbai and others purchases of Rs.1,41,…

Rajendra Tubes & Fittings, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7003/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) I.T.A. No. 7003/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year 2009-10)

Section 14A

…the addition, the assessee filed appeal before Ld CIT(A) challenging the addition made by the AO. The Ld CIT(A) noticed that the Hon’ble Gujarat High has upheld the estimation of profit from purchases made from grey market in the case of CIT Vs. Simit Sheth (356 ITR 451). Further he noticed that the assessee has also given consent to the addition. Accordingly the Ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO and hence the assessee has filed this appeal. 3. I heard the parties and perused the record. I notice that the assessee has agreed for the addition of 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. At the time of…

Nirav Harshad Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO 32(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4878/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147

…tended before AO that the purchase should be treated as genuine. But the AO in both the cases treated the purchase as bogus and applying profit rate at the rate of 12% by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj). Aggrieved assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of the AO and in both the cases the order of CIT(A) is identically worded and the relevant Para 3.5 of the appellant order in the case of Nirav H Sheth reads as under: - “3.5 It is seen from record that the A.O. has not mechanically disallowed the entire…

Harshad V. Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO 32(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4877/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147

…tended before AO that the purchase should be treated as genuine. But the AO in both the cases treated the purchase as bogus and applying profit rate at the rate of 12% by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj). Aggrieved assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of the AO and in both the cases the order of CIT(A) is identically worded and the relevant Para 3.5 of the appellant order in the case of Nirav H Sheth reads as under: - “3.5 It is seen from record that the A.O. has not mechanically disallowed the entire…

Asst CIT 18(1), Mumbai vs. Chetan Pravin Chitalia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4524/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…m. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) erred in allowing purchases by placing reliance on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Simit P Sheth O/TAXAP/552/2012 Tax Appeal NO 533 of 2012 dt. 16.01.2013 (356 ITR 451) and ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of M/s Vijay Proteins Ltd Vs ACIT 58 ITD 428 and ITAT, Mumbai decision in the case of Rajiv G. Kalathi in ITA No 6727/Mum12012 dtd. 20 08.2014 in AY 2009-10, which are not relevant to the facts of the instant case. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in restrict…

ITO 32(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Harshad V. Sheth HUF, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3656/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147

…tended before AO that the purchase should be treated as genuine. But the AO in both the cases treated the purchase as bogus and applying profit rate at the rate of 12% by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj). Aggrieved assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of the AO and in both the cases the order of CIT(A) is identically worded and the relevant Para 3.5 of the appellant order in the case of Nirav H Sheth reads as under: - “3.5 It is seen from record that the A.O. has not mechanically disallowed the entire…

Shree Gurudev Traders, Boisar vs. ITO WD 4 Palghar, Palghar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 6622/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am

Section 143(3)

…stries for the cross examination verification of truth. I will not consider affidavit made by the above party. Further I required affidavit copy of above party. 2. I am also enclosing Xerox copy of the decision Gujrat High Court CIT V/so Simith P. Seth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Gujrat) & ict v/s. Bholenath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Gujrat) for your record." 4. However, AO did not agree with assessee’s contention and added entire purchases in assessee’s income. 5. By the impugned order, CIT(A) confirmed the same. Assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. I have gone through the orders of the authorities b…