CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

Saifuddinbhai H. Deesawala, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao

…he Revenue relied on the binding judgment of the 4. Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd (216 taxman 171 (Bom)) as well as the judgment of the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.) wherein 12.5% was approved. 5. On hearing both the parties and on perusal of the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the cited precedents and the relevant material placed before the Tribunal, I find, the order of the CIT (A) in general and para 4 of his order in particular is fair and reasonable. In my view, the said decision of…

Thanmal H. Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ Thanmal H Jain, Ito-19(3)(5), R.No.201, 2 Nd Floor, Prop. M/S. Bhavana Sales Vs. Corporation, 147-A, Sant Sena Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Maharaj Marg, 2Nd Mumbai – 400 007. Kumbharwada, Mumbai-004. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Acdpj2247B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…re us, I find, the decision taken by the CIT (A) vide para 7.10 of his order is relevant in this regard. In the said para, FAA supported the view taken by the AO, who relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (356 ITR 451) (Guj) which is in support of 12.5%. For the sake completeness of this order, relevant lines from the said prara 7.10 of the CIT (A)‟s order are extracted as under:- “7.10........but considering the facts of the case and relying on the decision of the Gujarat High court decision in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj), added 12.5% of…

Chhaganlal Solanki, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(1)(3) (Currently ITO WD. 22(1)(3)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ Shri Chhaganlal Solanki, Ito-19(1)(3), 99/3, Dr. Mahimtura Marg, Mumbai. Vs. 3Rd Kumbharwada, Mumbai-004. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Anlps8277P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER फनाभ/ Shri Chhaganlal Solanki, ITO-19(1)(3), 99/3, Dr. Mahimtura Marg, Mumbai. Vs. 3rd Kumbharwada, Mumbai-004. स्थामी रेखा सं./ PAN : ANLPS8277P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Gautam Salecha प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Mrs. Beena Santosh, DR सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 11.04.2017 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 26.04.2017 आदेश / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee on 13.10.2016 is against th…

V & V Pharma Industries, Thane vs. ACIT Cir. 3, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ V & V Pharma Industries, Acit, Circle-3, 73, “Sanskruti Prasad”, Thane. Vs. Ram Maruti Road, Thane (W), 400 602. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aadfv 7814 L (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…e bogus purchases as addition u/s 69C is no longer sustainable in law considering the the Bombay High Court Judgment in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterpries P Ltd (372 ITR 619) (Bom) and Gujrath High Court Judgment in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.) wherein restricting the addition to GP rate of 12.50% is approved. Accordingly I order and direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance to only 12.50% of the sum of Rs. 1,930/-. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the o…

ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan vs. Ruchi Menthol P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ Ito, Ward-1(3), M/S. Ruchi Menthol Pvt Ltd., Kalyan, 1St Floor, 104, Malhar Palace No.1, Vs. Mohan Plaza, Wayale Nagar, Manpada Road, Opp. Kasturi Khadakpada, Kalyan. Plaza, Dombivali East-401202. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaccr9361G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…e upheld without any changes. The said decision of the CIT (A) is in tune with the binding Bombay High Court Judgment in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterpries P Ltd (372 ITR 619) (Bom) and Gujrath High Court Judgment in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.). Accordingly, I am of the opinion, the CIT (A)‟s decision is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference. Thus, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 4. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26thApril, 2017. (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai;…

Stulz Chspl (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ram Lal Negi

…t of the assessee. Accordingly, we direct the AO to recomputed the addition relying on the Bombay High Court Judgment in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterpries P Ltd (372 ITR 619) (Bom) and Gujrath High Court Judgment in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.). 5. Further, Ld AR submitted further reduction from the said 12.5% to the extent of the VAT paid by the assessee second time. In our opinion, the assessee should not be put to loss on this account. AO is directed to do the needful. In this regard, we direct the AO to examine the claim and decide this part of the submission afresh after gr…

DCIT 13(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Royal Palms (India )P. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…1 Royal Palms (P) Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T.GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.3838/Mum/2016 - A.Y. 2007-08 I.T.A. No.3837/Mum/2016 - A.Y. 2008-09 I.T.A. No.3839/Mum/2016 - A.Y. 2009-10 I.T.A. No.3836/Mum/2016 - A.Y. 2011-12 ACIT-13(3)(1), Mumbai vs M/s Royal Palms Pvt Ltd Royal Palms Estate, Survey No.169, Aarey Milk Colony, Near Unit No.126, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-65 PAN No. AABCR9424R (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.3866/Mum/2016 - A.Y. 2007-08 I.T.A. No.3867/Mum/2016 - A.Y. 2008-09 I.T.A. No.3868/Mum/2016 -…

DCIT 15(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sterling Electro Enterparises P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and the CO of the assessee are decided protanto

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit-15(3)(2), फनाभ/ Sterling Electro Enterprises R.No. 451, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt Ltd., Vs. 101-106, Exim Link 1 St Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Mulund Goregaon Road, Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup (W), Mumbai-78. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcs6528H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) C.O. No.175/M/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1506/M/2015) (Ay 2009-2010) Sterling Electro Enterprises Pvt फनाभ/ Dcit-15(3)(2), R.No. 451, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Ltd., Vs. 101-106, Exim Link 1 St Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mulund Goregaon Road, 20. Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup (W), Mumbai-78. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcs6528H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Revenue By : Dr. A.K. Nayak, Dr

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT-15(3)(2), फनाभ/ Sterling Electro Enterprises R.No. 451, 4th Floor, Aayakar Pvt Ltd., Vs. 101-106, Exim Link 1 st Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Mulund Goregaon Road, Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup (W), Mumbai-78. स्थामी रेखा सं./ PAN : AABCS6528H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) C.O. No.175/M/2016 (Arising out of ITA No.1506/M/2015) (AY 2009-2010) Sterling Electro Enterprises Pvt फनाभ/ DCIT-15(3)(2), R.No. 451, 4th Floor, Aayakar Ltd., Vs. 1…

ITO 25(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Shree Krishna Chaitanya Enterprises, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ram Lal Negiफनाभ/ Income Tax Officer-25(1)(2), M/S. Shree Krishna Chaitanya R.No.204, C-11, Pratyaksh Kar Enterprises, Vs. Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, 102, A-Wing, Radha Vilas, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. Apartment, Kandarpada, Dahisar (W), Mumbai – 68. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Abeps7379H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…red on the website of the Sales tax Department, Maharashtra. Bringing our attention to the Bombay High Court Judgment in the case of Nikunj Eximp Enterpries P Ltd (372 ITR 619) (Bom) and Gujrath High Court Judgment in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.), Ld Representatives of both parties submitted that given the cited judgments and other orders of the Tribunal, restriction of the addition to 12.5% of the said purchases would meet the both ends of justice. On hearing both the parties and perusing the orders of the Revenue, we are of the considered opinion that AO should be directed to re…

Jayesh A Shah, Thane vs. ITO WD 4(2), Thane

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.6288/M/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) I.T.A. No.6289/M/2016 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) I.T.A. No.6290/M/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-2011) फनाभ/ Shri Jayesh A Shah, ITO Ward-4(2), D/201, Sundervan, Thane. Vs. Vasant Karishma Complex, Ambadi Road, Vashi (W), Thane – 401202. स्थामी रेखा सं./ PAN : AFCPS7516N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Bhupendra Shah प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Mrs. Beena Santosh, DR सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hea…

ITO WD 1(5), Kalyan vs. Gopal Ramshish Tripathi, Bhiwandi

In the result, the appeal for all three years, are PARTLY

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am

…w of these facts, the Ld AR requested that appellant being wholesale trader, the disallowance, at the most may be restricted @ 12.5% of the hawala purchases/suppressed GP, in the light of decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P Seth, 356 ITR 451. 10.12 In order to ascertain the impact of bogus purchases on GP rate, the appellant was required to furnish the comparative trading details - sales GP, GP rate in respect of regular parties vis-a-vis alleged hawala parties. In compliance, the appellant has submitted as under: A.Y.09-10 Particulars Total Sales Gr. Profit GP Ratio Affected (%) Sal…

ITO 32(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Pushpaben R.Shah, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are partly allowed

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

…the investigation and statements and information obtained by Sales Tax Authorities from these parties held that the assessee’s purchases are bogus and accordingly considering the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Smith P Seth (2013) 365 ITR 451(GJ) and Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 applied profit rate at the rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases at Rs.3,79,80,768 and made addition accordingly for an amount of Rs. 47,47,596/-. For this the AO gave following reasons: - “a. The assessee has failed to substantiate the claim' of purchases made from the parties against overwh…

ITO 32(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Pushpaben R.Shah, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are partly allowed

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

…the investigation and statements and information obtained by Sales Tax Authorities from these parties held that the assessee’s purchases are bogus and accordingly considering the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Smith P Seth (2013) 365 ITR 451(GJ) and Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 applied profit rate at the rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases at Rs.3,79,80,768 and made addition accordingly for an amount of Rs. 47,47,596/-. For this the AO gave following reasons: - “a. The assessee has failed to substantiate the claim' of purchases made from the parties against overwh…

Rakesh Inder Bachani, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 30(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Mr. Rakesh Inder Bachani, Income Tax Officer, C-603, Himachal Building, Ward 30(3)(1), C13, 6Th Floor, S.V. Road, Malad (West), Vs. Mumbai – 400 064 Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Bandra (East) Pan: Aeypb3889C Mumbai - 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Haresh P. Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Miss Anupama Singla, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 10.04.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2017 O R D E R

…d parties. The enquiry and investigation conducted by the Sales Tax Department declared them as hawala dealers. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the decision of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 58 taxmann.com 44 (Guj.) and CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj.) and held that only profit embedded can be added in such transaction of purchase and sales. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) is justified in his action and our interference is not required. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10.04.2017. (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 10…

Ratnagiri Stainless P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4463/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Income Tax Officer 5(3)(1), बनाम/ Ltd., Mumbai. V. 21/23, Laxmi Niwas, 2 Nd Parsiwada Lane, Opp V.P. Road Police Station, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadcr2993P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “H” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4463/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/s Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Income Tax Officer 5(3)(1), बनाम/ Ltd., Mumbai. v. 21/23, Laxmi Niwas, 2 nd Parsiwada Lane, Opp V.P. Road Police Station, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AADCR2993P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri N.M. Porwal Revenue by : Ms. Pooja Swaroop,DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 02-03-2017…

Econ Pipe and Fitting P.Ltd, Bhiwandi vs. ITO WD 1(1), Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoi.T.A. No.5690/M/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-2011) फनाभ/ Elcon Pipe & Fittings Private The Income Tax Officer- Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. B-8, Godown No.7, Prithvi Mohan Plaza, Wayale Nagar, Complex-Ii, Pipe Line Kalher, Khadakpada, Kalyan (W), Bhiwandi-421302. Thane – 421301. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabce9399J (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Ajay R. Singh प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Mrs. Beena Santosh, Dr

…(A) decided the appeal partly allowing the appeal of the assessee. In his order, CIT (A) held that restricting the addition to 12.5% of the said purchases is reasonable. He relied on the Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.) in this regard. However, CIT (A) restricted the disallowance to the extent of Rs. 8,94,847/- (ie total hawala purchases of Rs.71,58,777/- and 12.5% of such purchases is worked out to Rs. 8,94,847/-). Aggrieved with the said decision of the CIT (A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the above mentioned ground. 5. During…

Nikopas Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Nikopas Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO 2(2)(3) 41/42, Paddar Chambers, 5th Floor, Aayakr Bhavan, S.A. Brelvi Road, Fort, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai - 400020 PAN No. AAACN1371J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupendra Shah, AR Revenue by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, DR Date of Hearing : 16/01/2017 Date of pronouncement: 30/03/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant asse…

Sanjeev A Chheda, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 30(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4466/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Sanjeev Amritlal Chheda, Income Tax Officer बनाम/ T-6, Seksaria Industrial Ward 30(3)(2), V. Estate, C13, Room No. 610, S.V. Road, Malad (West), 6 Th Floor, Mumbai – 400 064. Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Bandra (East), Mumbai.400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpc8631Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…Act, the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the additions made the A.O. by relying upon the decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. CIT (2015] 58 taxmann.com 44 ITA 4466/Mum/2016 5 (Guj) and CIT v. Simit P. Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has purchased material from some other sources, hence, profit earned was much higher than the normal GP ratio. The ld. CIT(A) observed that total disallowance of Rs. 6,00,329/- had been made by the A.O. on bogus purchases of Rs. 19,50,220/-, hence, the disallowance comes to 30.78% of bogus purchas…

Sneha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 7(2)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ M/S. Sneha Alloys Pvt Ltd., Ito-7(2)(4), 193/3, Station Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Wadala, Mumbai – 400 031. Churchgate, Mumbai. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aafcs8231F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…erusal of the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the relevant material placed before the Tribunal, I am of the opinion that borrowing 12.50% is approved by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court vide its judgment in the case of CIT vs. Simit P Sheth [2013] (356 ITR 451) (Guj.) is found to be applicable to the real estate / civil contract business and not to the assessee, who is engaged in the business of trading in iron and steel. It is an agreed position that the matter should be remanded to the file of the AO for considering the facts of the present case, ie negative GP of the present case, and the applicable…

ITO 5(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kamdhenu Valves P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ Ito-5(2)(2), M/S. Kamdhenu Valves Pvt 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Shop No.9, Jain Bhavan, Dr. Bhajekar Street, Mumbai-400004. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaack3257G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Ms. Beena Santosh, Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Ms. Hemlata Bhungare सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2017 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue On 1.6.2016 Is Against The Order Of The Cit (A)-10, Mumbai Dated 22.2.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. In This Appeal, Revenue Raised Two Main Grounds & They Revolve Around The Core Issue Relating To The Addition On Account Of „Bogus Purchases‟ From The Suppliers Whose Names Are Appearing In The Official Website Of The Sales Tax Department. This Is The Case Where The Assessing Officer Made Addition Of Such Entire Bogus Purchases. Aggrieved With The Said Decision Of The Ao Assessee Carried The Matter In Appeal Before The First Appellate Authority. 3. During The Proceedings Before The First Appellate Authority, Cit (A) Relied On The Judgment Of The Hon‟Ble Jurisdictional High Court In The Case Of Nickunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd Vs. Acit Vide Writ Petition No. 2860 Of 2012, Dated 18Th June, 2014 & Disproved The Addition Made By The Ao U/S 69C Of The Act. Further, Relying On The Ratio Laid Down By The Hon‟Ble Gujarat High Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Simit P. Sheth [2013] 356 Itr 451, Cit (A) Restricted The Addition To 12.50% Of Such Alleged Bogus Purchases. Aggrieved With The Relief Granted By The Cit (A), Revenue Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal By Raising The Above Grounds.

…es Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT vide Writ petition No. 2860 of 2012, dated 18th June, 2014 and disproved the addition made by the AO u/s 69C of the Act. Further, relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth [2013] 356 ITR 451, CIT (A) restricted the addition to 12.50% of such alleged bogus purchases. Aggrieved with the relief granted by the CIT (A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the above grounds. 4. During the proceedings before the Tribunal, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on the order of the CIT (A) and reiterated the submissions made befo…