CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd.

ACIT, Central Circle1(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Peninsula Land Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahaman, Accountat Member Ita No. 5632 & 5633/Mum/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Acit, Cc – 1(3) Vs. M/S Peninsula Land 905, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Ltd., Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg, No. 2, Peninsula (Annexe), M.K .Road, Spenta, Mathuradas Mumbai – 400020. Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Parel, Mumbai- 400013. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaact5173A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Aditya Rai. Dr Respondent By : Shri. Vijay Mehta.Ar Date Of Hearing 24.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Are The Two Appeals Filed The By The Revenue Against The Common Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai Passed U/S 153A R.W.S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act.

…ase price but only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. The Hon'ble High Court referred to a similar view taken in the case of CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 40 taxmann.com 22/219 Taxman 145 (Mag.)/355 ITR 498 (Guj.) and CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (P.) Ltd. [2013] 40 taxmann.com 494/[2014] 220 Taxman 82 (Mag.)/[2013] 355 ITR 290 (Guj.). ITA No. 5632 & 5633/Mum/2019 M/s peninsula Land Ltd., Mumbai. Therefore, the Id. CIT(A) has rightly directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to 12.5% of the disputed purchases. We uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A)…

M/S Kuldeep Glass and Aluminium, Mumbai vs. ITO 29(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, in our considered opinion the order of the Ld

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…Ltd., 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) iv. Sanket Steel Traders Vs. ITO (ITA Nos. 2801 & 2937/Ahd/2008 dated 20.05.2011. v. Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) vi. CIT Vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj.) vii. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj.) viii. Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, 5(3)(1), Mumbai (2017) 164 ITD 136 (Mum.Trib.). 16. Here it is pertinent to identify whether purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. As sales has been accepted by the Department, in that vie…

Kuldeep Glass and Aluminium, Mumbai vs. ITO 23 (2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, in our considered opinion the order of the Ld

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…Ltd., 355 ITR 290 (Guj.) iv. Sanket Steel Traders Vs. ITO (ITA Nos. 2801 & 2937/Ahd/2008 dated 20.05.2011. v. Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) vi. CIT Vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj.) vii. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj.) viii. Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, 5(3)(1), Mumbai (2017) 164 ITD 136 (Mum.Trib.). 16. Here it is pertinent to identify whether purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. As sales has been accepted by the Department, in that vie…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Range- 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Abhishek Millennium Contracts Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is dismissed

…xmann.com 385 (Guj). We have also considered the judgment of Hon‘ble Apex Court in the case of N. K. Proteins Vrs. DCIT, but the facts of that case was altogether different. We have also considered the judgment in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and in that case also, the facts of the case are different from the facts of the present case. In that case, A.O had brought adequate material on record to prove that the cross cheques had not been given to parties from whom supplies were allegedly procured but these were encashed from a bank account in the name of another entity, possibly…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Range- 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Abhishek Millennium Contracts Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

…xmann.com 385 (Guj). We have also considered the judgment of Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of N. K. Proteins Vrs. DCIT, but the facts of that case was altogether different. We have also considered the judgment in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and in that case also, the facts of the case are different from the facts of the present case. In that case, A.O had brought adequate material on record to prove that the cross cheques had not been given to parties from whom supplies were allegedly procured but these were encashed from a bank account in the name of another entity, possibly…

ITO Ward-3(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Chunilal Doshi, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

…38 taxmann 385) has held that not the entire purchases but only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. Similar view has been taken by the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Vijay M Mistry Construction Pvt Ltd(355 ITR 498), Bholanath Polyfab(P) Ltd (355 ITR 290) and Vijay Proteins Ltd. ( 58 taxmann 44) Considering the facts of case and in view of various decisions as discussed above, it is held that only profit element of 18.45% embedded in the bogus purchases of Rs. 10,96,581/- that is Rs. 2,02,320/- is to be added to the income of appellant. Accordingly, the add…

DCIT 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S B. Chopda Construction P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is Partly Allowed

Bench: Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1513/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-9(2)(1) बिधम/ M/S. B. Chopda Construction Room No.665A, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, A-208, Sagar Tech Plaza, Churchgate, Mumbai- Sakinaka Junction, Andheri, 400020. Mumbai-400072. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb4214G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohan Tandon Revenue By: Shri Himanshu Sharma (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 27.12.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -16, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “11. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Restricting The Suppressed Profit To The Extent Of 12.50% Of Bogus Purchases, When The Assessee Could Not Produce Any Parties Or Evidence That The Said Goods Were Purchased A.Y.2012-13 & The Onus Of Proving Genuineness Of Purchases Was Not Discharged By The Assessee.

…unts, only the profit clement embedded in such purchases could be added to such no question of law arose in such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. Ahmedabad 6.2.30 In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon’ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties by…

ITO Ward-3(1), Kalyan vs. Jeeju Nair, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

…Court in the case of Harima Bharubhai - ITA No. 313 of 2013) has held that only the profit attributable to the unaccounted sales can be brought to tax. Similar view has been taken by the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Vijay M Mistry Construction Pvt Ltd (355 ITR 498), Bholanath Polyfab (P) Ltd (355 ITR 290) and Vijay Proteins Ltd (58 taxmann 44). The Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT, in the case of Simit P Sheh v/s ITO, in ITA No. 3238 and 3293/Ahd/2009 has held that "the malpractice of bogus purchase is mainly to save 10% sales tax etc. It has a/so been informed that in this industry about 2 5% is the profit margin.…

ITO Ward - 3(1), Kalyan vs. Bharat Valabhbhai Valiya, Dombivli

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Om Prakash Kant, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 593/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Ito, Ward – 3(1) Bharat Valabhbhai Valiya 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion, Prop. Of M/S. Industrial Vs. Murbad Road, Kalyan Switchgear, B-10, Gurudatta (West)-421301. Tower, Pandurangwadi, Manpada Road, Dombivli (E), 421201. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agbpv1605R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Ms. Bhoomika Patel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 26.02.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -01, Thane [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Thane Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 6,56,771/- Out Of The Total Addition Of Rs. 7,50,595/- Made On Account Of Bogus Purchases, Despite Holding That The Purchases Were Not A.Y.2010-11 Genuine & The Assessee Failed To Prove Genuineness Of The Transactions.

…gh Court in the case of Harma Bharubhai - ITA No. 313 of 2013) has held that only the profit attributable to the unaccounted sales can be brought to tax Similar view has been taken by the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Vijay M Mistry Construction Pvt Ltd (355 ITR 498), Bholanath Polyfab (P) Ltd (355 ITR 290) and Vijay Proteins Ltd (58 taxmann 44). 6.2 The Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT, in the case of Simit P Sheh v/s ITO, in ITA No. 3238 and 3293/Ahd/2009 has held that "the malpractice of bogus purchase is mainly to save 10% sales tax etc. It has also been informed that in this industry about 2.5% is the profit mar…

ITO WD 3(1), Kalyan vs. Potdar Ajit Krishnaji (HUF, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Om Prakash Kant, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 592/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Ito, Ward-3(1) Potdar Ajit Krishnaji (Huf) 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion, V Krishna Steel Trading, Vs. Murbad Road, Kalyan (W) Vijay Baug, Varap Village, 421301. Murbad Road, Kalyan (W)- 421301. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaehp2434D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sanjiv Brahme Revenue By: Ms. Bhoomika Patel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 03.02.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -01, Thane [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “A) Grounds Of Appeal 1. The Learned Income Tai Officer Has Erred In Reopening The Assessment U/S 148. A.Y.2010-11 Without Prejudice To The Above

…8 taxmann 385) has held that not the entire purchases but only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. Similar view has been taken by the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Vijay M Mistry Construction Pvt Ltd (355 ITR 498), Bholanath Polyfab (P) Ltd (355 ITR 290) and Vijay Proteins Ltd (58 taxmann 44). 4 A.Y.2010-11 5.3.2 The Hon’ble Ahmedabad ITAT, in the case of Simit P Sheh v/s ITO, in ITA No. 3238 and 3293/Ahd/2009 has held that “the malpractice of bogus purchase is mainly to save 10% sales tax etc. It has also been informed that in this industry about 2.5% i…

DCIT 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Prince Marine Transport Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-1(2)(2), M/S Prince Marine Transport R. No. 535, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Services Pvt. Ltd., Roopam M.K. Road, Building, 2Nd Floor, 239 P Mumbai-400020. D”Mello Road, Mumbai-400 001. Pan No. Aaecp 3695 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021

…embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of law arose in such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 7.26 In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon'ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties by…

ITO -8(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Simandar Herbal P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 8(2)(2) V. M/S. Simandar Herbal Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 622, 6Th Floor Shop No. 86, Dallas Building Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Gya Mandir Road Mumbai - 400020 Off. S.K. Bole Road Dadar (W), Mumbai -400028 Pan: Aagc0699Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Prayag Jha Assessee By : Department By Smita Verma

…embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of law arose in such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon’ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties by cros…

ITO, Ward 3(4), Kalyan vs. Smt Sunita C Khandelwal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 3505/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal Ward-3(4), Kalyan Prop. Amita Steel 2N D Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Corporation, फनाभ/ Road, Kalyan-421301 E-1/5, Near Avery Bridge, Kalyan Shill Road, Midc, Vs. Dombivali (E)-421203 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Afgpk6867E अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Bharat Andhale, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Rajendra Deshpande, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-1, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. 10352/2017-18 Vide Dated 19.03.2019. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(4), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Y. 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 15.12.2017 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal; Ay 10-11 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A) Restricting The Disallowance Of Bogus Purchase/ Unproved Purchases At 12.5% By Estimating The Gross Profit Under Section 69C Of The Act Instead Of 100% Disallowance Made By Assessing Officer.

…taxmann 385) has held that not the entire purchases but only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. Similar view has been taken by the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Vijay M Mistry Construction Pvt. Ltd (355 ITR 498), Bholanath Polyfab (P) Ltd (355 ITR 290) and Vijay Proteins Ltd (58 taxmann 44). Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal; AY 10-11 7.3 From the submissions of the appellant it is observed that the facts of the case of the appellant are similar to that of Magnum Steels for AY 2010-11. The appellant during the course of assessment as well as appellate proceedin…

ACIT 17 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Rashmi Bearing Co, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5732/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-17(3) बिधम/ M/S. Rashmi Bearing Co. Room No.122, 1St Floor, 115, Room No.7, 2Nd Floor Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, G- Block Nagdevi Street, Mumbai- Bkc, Mumbai-400051. 400003. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaefr2683Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Ms. Smita Verma (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Gandhi सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/04/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 17.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. "Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Justified In Restricting The Addition Made By The Ao To 12.5% Of Bogus Purchases As Against The Addition Made At 17.04% Of The Bogus Purchases, Ignoring That There Was No Compliance To The Notices Issued U/S 133(6) By Ao & The Assessee Was Also Unable To Prove The Genuineness Of The. Purchases Either, By Producing The Suppliers For Examination Or By Furnishing

…purchase price but only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. This decision was taken in view of the earlier decisions of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [20131 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (P.) Ltd. (20131 355 ITR 290 (Guj). The Court also held that if the entire purchases were wholly bogus and there was a finding of fact on record that no purchases were made at all, the counsel for the Revenue would be justified in arguing that the entire amount of such bogus purchases should be a…

Pr. CIT- 9, Mumbai vs. Amrin Construction Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepr.Cit -9 V. M/S. Amrin Construction Pvt. Ltd., 8, Sagar Tower, Fair Deal Road {Income Tax Officer – 9(1)(2)} Room No. 205, 2Nd Floor Off. S.V.Road, Jogeshwari(W) Mumbai - 400102 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaeca3216B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By Shri Brajendra Kumar

…embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of law arose in such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, IT AT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 6.1.30 In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon'ble IT AT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said partie…

DCIT - 11(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Samanta Organics P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3229 To 3231/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Dcit-11(1)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Samanta Organics Pvt. Room No.1, Ground Floor, Ltd. Vs. M. K. Road, Aayakar 194, Arvind Chambers, Off, Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Western Express Highway, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400069. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs2099B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/04/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 18, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2009-10 To 2011-12

…embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee‟s income and as such no question of law arose in such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon‟ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 5.2.29 In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon‟ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties…

Asst CIT Circle-11 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Shriji Kraft Decorators Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

…embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of law arose in such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 5.3.29 In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon'ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties…