CIT v. Simit P. Sheth

ITO 31(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mukesh M Parmar, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ravish Soodi.T.A. No.4172/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) I.T.A. No.4173/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) फनाभ/ Ito-31(2)(3), Mr. Mukesh M. Parmar, R.No.704, C-11, Pratyakshakar B-16, Shreyas Industrial Vs. Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra (E), Estate, Nr. Jay Coach, Mumbai – 400 051. Goregaon (E), Mumbai – 400 063. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaepp2846H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Jothilakshmi Nayak, Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : None

…isturbed. This line of adjudication has the strength of jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd (216 Taxman.com 171) (Bom.) and judgment of the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) (Guj.). Considering the overall factual matrix of the case, we are of the opinion, the decision taken by the CIT (A) vide para 3.5 of his order is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 7. This appeal filed by t…

DCIT 13(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Nihar Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

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

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘’I’’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA ( ACCOUNT MEMBER) I.T.A.Nos. 3020 to 3024/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd V/s DCIT, 13(1)(1) [Erstwhile DCIT-9(2)] 117, CD Government Industrial Mumbai Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kandivli (W), Mumbai- 67 PAN : AABCN9153N Appellant Respondent I.T.A.Nos. 3790 to 3794/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) DCIT, 13(1)(1), Mumbai V/s Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd 117, CD Government Industrial Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kan…

Nihaar Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 13(1)(1)

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

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

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘’I’’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA ( ACCOUNT MEMBER) I.T.A.Nos. 3020 to 3024/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd V/s DCIT, 13(1)(1) [Erstwhile DCIT-9(2)] 117, CD Government Industrial Mumbai Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kandivli (W), Mumbai- 67 PAN : AABCN9153N Appellant Respondent I.T.A.Nos. 3790 to 3794/Mum/2015 ( Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2011-12 ) DCIT, 13(1)(1), Mumbai V/s Nihar Equipment Pvt Ltd 117, CD Government Industrial Estate, Hindustan Naka, Charkop, Kan…

Metropolitan Eximchem Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst. CIT - 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, ground No 3 in assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM I.T.A. No. 2935/Mum/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Metropolitan Eximchem Ltd. Asst. CIT-6(3) 5th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 201/B, Runal & Omkar Esquare, Vs. Opp. Sion Chunabhatti Signal, M.K. Road Eastern Express Highway, Sion(E) Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400022 PAN: AAACM9514C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Satish Mory Respondent by : Shri Purushottam Kumar (Sr.A.R.) Date of Hearing : 07/03/2017 Date of Pronouncement : 29/03/2017 O R D E R PER D. T. GARASIA, JM: This appeal is filed by the…

Harish Radeshyam Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 30(1)(4), 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.5515/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Shri Harish Radeshyam The Income Tax Officer – बनाम/ Khandelwal, 30(1)(4), V. C/O D.C. Jain & Co., C-13, 6 Th Floor, 75, Bombay Mutual Bldg. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, 293, Room No. 604, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400 001. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpk6531H (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.5515/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Shri Harish Radeshyam The Income Tax Officer – बनाम/ Khandelwal, 30(1)(4), v. C/o D.C. Jain & Co., C-13, 6 th floor, 75, Bombay Mutual Bldg. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, 293, Room No. 604, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400 001. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AABPK6531H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee b…

Asst CIT 14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Batliboi Environmental Enginnering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue and that of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargm/S. Batliboi Environmental D C I T – 14(1)(1) Engineering Ltd. 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 Pan – Aaach1091B Appellant Respondent A C I T – 14(1)(1) M/S. Batliboi Environmental Room No. 460, 4Th Floor Engineering Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 Pan – Aaach1091B Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member M/s. Batliboi Environmental D C I T – 14(1)(1) Engineering Ltd. 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 PAN – AAACH1091B Appellant Respondent A C I T – 14(1)(1) M/s. Batliboi Environmental Room No. 460, 4th Floor Engineering Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 PAN – AAACH1091B Appellant Respondent Assessee…

Batliboi Inviornmental Engineering Ltd, Kalyan vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue and that of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargm/S. Batliboi Environmental D C I T – 14(1)(1) Engineering Ltd. 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 Pan – Aaach1091B Appellant Respondent A C I T – 14(1)(1) M/S. Batliboi Environmental Room No. 460, 4Th Floor Engineering Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 Pan – Aaach1091B Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member M/s. Batliboi Environmental D C I T – 14(1)(1) Engineering Ltd. 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 PAN – AAACH1091B Appellant Respondent A C I T – 14(1)(1) M/s. Batliboi Environmental Room No. 460, 4th Floor Engineering Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 25/26, Deonar Ancillary Indl. Mumbai 400020 Estate. Deonar, Govandi (W) Mumbai 400043 PAN – AAACH1091B Appellant Respondent Assessee…

Kunj Behari Kedia, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 30(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Kunj Behari Kedia Income Tax Officer, 227 Rajratna Indl Estate, Liberty Ward 30(2)(1) Garden Rd Opp Sndt Girls Vs. Mumbai-20 College, Malad (W) Mumbai-400 064 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Abopk7365F Assessee By .. Shri Ritesh Jain, Ar Revenue By .. Miss Beena Santosh, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 14-03-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 14-03-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

…ed to be bogus purchases without appreciating that there cannot be any sates of diamond jewellery without purchases of the aforesaid diamonds. 7. In view of the above facts, we observe that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT(A) v. Smith P Seth 365 ITR 451 (Guj) wherein Hon’ble High Court’s finding is that estimation of rate of profit may unnecessarily very with the nature of business and no uniform yardsticks can be adopted. Hon'ble High Court has confirmed the profit rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases as estimated by ITAT being profit and embedded of such transaction, we also Page 5 of 6 KunjBe…

Neon Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am Neon Laboratories Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 140 Damji Shamji Indl Complex, (Osd) 8(1) Mahakali Caves, Rd Andheri (E) Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 093 M.K. Rd Churchgate, Mumbai-20 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1299D Assessee By .. Shri V.G. Ginde, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Suman Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 08-03-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 08-03-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

…is held that the assessee has inflated its expenses by taking bogus bills of purchases from the hawala dealers. Considering the facts and circumstances of case in totality, and relying upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451, the disallowance is restricted to 12.5% of the Bogus Purchases of Rs.16,98,385/-.The AO directed the revise the disallowance accordingly.” 5. Similarly, the CIT(A) in AY 2011-12 also restricted the disallowance of bogus purchase at 12.5%. In view of this learned Counsel for the assessee only requested for taking a consistent view. On the other…

Nareshkumar Singhania, Mumbai vs. ACIT 23(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am Naresh Kumar Singhania Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C-10 2Nd Floor, Pratiyakshkar 136 Shivkripa Indl Estate Lbs Vs. Marg Vikhroli (W) Bhavna, Bkc Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 083 Mumbai-400050 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaips1233M A.Y: 2010-11 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Naresh Kumar Singhania C-10 2Nd Floor, Pratiyakshkar 136 Shivkripa Indl Estate Lbs Vs. Bhavna, Bkc Bandra(E) Marg Vikhroli (W) Mumbai-400050 Mumbai-400 083 Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Keyvri Desai, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Suman Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 06-03-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 06-03-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

…ndings of Sales Tax Department. But we find that the estimation made by the CIT(A) at 15% is higher for the reason that he himself admitted the estimations ranging from 12.5% to 25% as upheld by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT(A) v. Smith P Seth 365 ITR 451 (Guj) wherein Hon’ble High Court’s finding is that estimation of rate of profit may unnecessarily vary with the nature of business and no uniform yardsticks can be adopted. Hon'ble High Court has confirmed the profit rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases as estimated by ITAT Page 6 of 7 ITA No.763 & 1274/Mum/2015 Naresh Kumar Singhania; AY.10-11…

ACIT Cir 29(2), Mumbai vs. Nareshkumar Singhania, Mumbai

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am Naresh Kumar Singhania Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C-10 2Nd Floor, Pratiyakshkar 136 Shivkripa Indl Estate Lbs Vs. Marg Vikhroli (W) Bhavna, Bkc Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 083 Mumbai-400050 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaips1233M A.Y: 2010-11 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Naresh Kumar Singhania C-10 2Nd Floor, Pratiyakshkar 136 Shivkripa Indl Estate Lbs Vs. Bhavna, Bkc Bandra(E) Marg Vikhroli (W) Mumbai-400050 Mumbai-400 083 Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Keyvri Desai, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Suman Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 06-03-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 06-03-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

…ndings of Sales Tax Department. But we find that the estimation made by the CIT(A) at 15% is higher for the reason that he himself admitted the estimations ranging from 12.5% to 25% as upheld by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT(A) v. Smith P Seth 365 ITR 451 (Guj) wherein Hon’ble High Court’s finding is that estimation of rate of profit may unnecessarily vary with the nature of business and no uniform yardsticks can be adopted. Hon'ble High Court has confirmed the profit rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases as estimated by ITAT Page 6 of 7 ITA No.763 & 1274/Mum/2015 Naresh Kumar Singhania; AY.10-11…

Niloufer Mustafa Nalawala, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(3)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoबनाम/ Mrs. Nilofer Mustafa Nalawala Income Tax Officer- (Proprietress Of Liberty 21(3)(4), Vs. Graphics), R.No. 2104, Summer Mumbai. Park, 4, Seth Motisha Lane Cross, Byculla, Mumbai-400027. स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Abmpn8288Q (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi प्रत्यथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Ms. Beena Santosh, Dr

…ht of the judgments in force ie judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt Ltd (216 Taxman.com 171) (Bom.) and judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Seth (356 ITR 451) (Guj.). Assessee shall be granted reasonable opportunity of being heard as per the set principles of natural justice. Accordingly, issues raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 03rd March, 2017. (D. KARUNAKARA…

Rashtriya Chemicals Copper Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(3)(1), Mumbai

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI SHRI C.N. PRASAD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.4931/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Shri Rashtriya Copper Corporation vs Income Tax Officer 18(3)(1), 4-A, Jawahar Mansion, Sitaram Mumbai Poddar Marg, Fanas Wadi Mumbai-400 002 PAN No. AAFFR0149G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Ratan Samal Respondent by Mrs Beena Santosh Date of hearing : 15-02-2017 Date of order : 27-02-2017 O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja, AM:- This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income-t…

Heeralal Meghraj Doshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 18(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

…ant further placed reliance in the following cases wherein it has been held that entire purchases cannot be disallowed and only profit element is to be added: i) CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. (2013)355 ITR 290 (Guj)(HC) ii) CIT V. Simit P Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)(High Court) 11. We notice that the assessing officer has placed reliance on the report given by the Sales tax department to come to the conclusion that the purchases made by the assessee from the suspicious dealers are not genuine. Even though the assessee has furnished evidences regarding receipt of goods and payments made to the supplier…

Ambernath Steel Tube and Sanitary Store, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 2(1), Kalyan

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

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasiaassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Ambernath Steel Tube & Income Tax Officer 2(1), Sanitary Store, Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Partner-Shri Vimal Adhia, Vs. Station Road, Wayale Nagar, Ambarnath (W)-421 501 Khadak Pada, Kalyan (W)- 421 301 Pan: Aahfa7639L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ravindra Poojari, A.R. Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2018 O R D E R

…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 parties were bogus which suppress to the profit now need to zero in correct…

ITO WD 3(2), Thane vs. Rajendra B. Jain, Thane

In the result the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri. D.T. Garasia & Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year 2009 – 10 Income Tax Officer V. Rajendra B Jain Ward 3(2), Thane Prop. Rainbow Wroght Iron Room No.04J, 6Th Floor, Furniture, 16, Lily Apartment Ashar It Park Aghayari Lane, Tembhi Naka Midc, Wagle Indl. Estate Thane (W) -400 601 Thane (W) – 400 604 Pan No.Aappj3404J (Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen Respondent By Shri N.A. Kulkarni C.O No.186/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2932/Mum/2016) Rajendra B Jain V. Income Tax Officer Prop. Rainbow Wroght Iron Ward 3(2), Thane Room No.04J, 6Th Floor, Furniture, 16, Lily Apartment Aghayari Lane, Tembhi Naka Ashar It Park Thane (W) -400 601 Midc, Wagle Indl. Estate Thane (W) – 400 604 Pan No.Aappj3404J (Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri N.A. Kulkarni Respondent By Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen

…of Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.. Moreover Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in M.K brothers 163 ITR 249 and he has relied upon the decision of Sanjay Oilcake Industry 316 ITR 274 decision of Gujaraj High Court and Gujarat High Court in case of Simit P sheth in 356 ITR 451 therefore he supports the action of the CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival contention of both the parties. Looking at facts and circumstances of the case we found that CIT(A) hs considered the various decisions of Gujarat High Court and Sanjay Oilcake Industry and held that entire on account of unverifiable purchases and when on account of purch…

Vishawashkati Construction Co., Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(3), Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain

…w, we may come to the stand of CIT(A) in sustaining the addition to the extent of 12.5% and not the entire amount of purchases. In this context, we find that the CIT(A) has referred to the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 and Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd., 355 ITR 290. In this context, the plea of assessee is that it is engaged in the business of municipal contracting carrying out work of road repairs, municipal building repairs, etc. for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. It is pointed out that the 6 M/s. Vishwashakti Construction ITA Nos. 1328, 1329, 11…

Vishawashkati Construction Co., Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(3), Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain

…w, we may come to the stand of CIT(A) in sustaining the addition to the extent of 12.5% and not the entire amount of purchases. In this context, we find that the CIT(A) has referred to the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 and Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd., 355 ITR 290. In this context, the plea of assessee is that it is engaged in the business of municipal contracting carrying out work of road repairs, municipal building repairs, etc. for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. It is pointed out that the 6 M/s. Vishwashakti Construction ITA Nos. 1328, 1329, 11…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Vishwashakti Construction, Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain

…w, we may come to the stand of CIT(A) in sustaining the addition to the extent of 12.5% and not the entire amount of purchases. In this context, we find that the CIT(A) has referred to the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 and Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd., 355 ITR 290. In this context, the plea of assessee is that it is engaged in the business of municipal contracting carrying out work of road repairs, municipal building repairs, etc. for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. It is pointed out that the 6 M/s. Vishwashakti Construction ITA Nos. 1328, 1329, 11…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Vishwashakti Construction, Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain

…w, we may come to the stand of CIT(A) in sustaining the addition to the extent of 12.5% and not the entire amount of purchases. In this context, we find that the CIT(A) has referred to the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth, 356 ITR 451 and Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd., 355 ITR 290. In this context, the plea of assessee is that it is engaged in the business of municipal contracting carrying out work of road repairs, municipal building repairs, etc. for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. It is pointed out that the 6 M/s. Vishwashakti Construction ITA Nos. 1328, 1329, 11…