ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. (P.) Ltd.

Sterling Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2009-10 is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.6154, 6155, 6156, 6157 & 6158/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) Sterling Jewels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit-5(3)(2) 208, A-Z Industrial Estate 460, Aaykar Bhawan Ganpatrao Kadam Marg M.K.Road, Churchgate Lower Parel (W) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs3316D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…sed in the following cases, 1. High Court of Delhi in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (2000) 112 Taxman 337 2. SC in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore co Ltd. (1991) 191 ITR 662 3. SC in the case of Selected Dalurband Coal Co P Ltd (1996) 217 ITR 597 (xi) The Hon’ble High court of Bombay in the recent decisions in the following cases while dealing with bogus purchases/loans issues has ruled that the initiation of reassessment proceedings on the basis of survey operations is held valid even though there was scrutiny u/s 143(3). The opened that it will not tantamount to change of opinion: (1) N…

DCIT, Central Cir-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Amazon Metals Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Acro Exports Trade Room No. 658, 6Th Floor Pvt.Ltd. 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 37-40 Subash Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057

…is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of escapement of income. This is so because [the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is within the realm of subjective satisfaction. [ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. (P.) Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC); Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd, vs I TO [1999]236 ITR 34 (SC)] 8.6 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of AOT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Lttd (2007) (291 ITR 500) has categorically stated that "reason to believe" does not mean that the reason for re-opening should have been factually ascertained by legal evidence or conclusion before…

Dcie Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Pali Fabrics Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 37-40 Subash Road Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.904/Mum/2018) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Cc-8(4) 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 37-40 Subash Road Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent)

…is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of escapement of income. This is so because [the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is within the realm of subjective satisfaction. [ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. (P.) Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC); Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd, vs I TO [1999]236 ITR 34 (SC)] 8.6 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of AOT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Lttd (2007) (291 ITR 500) has categorically stated that "reason to believe" does not mean that the reason for re-opening should have been factually ascertained by legal evidence or conclusion before t…

DCIT Central Cir-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Acro Exports Trade Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Acro Exports Trade Room No. 658, 6Th Floor Pvt.Ltd. 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 37-40 Subash Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057

…is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of escapement of income. This is so because [the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is within the realm of subjective satisfaction. [ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. (P.) Ltd. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC); Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd, vs I TO [1999]236 ITR 34 (SC)] 8.6 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of AOT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Lttd (2007) (291 ITR 500) has categorically stated that "reason to believe" does not mean that the reason for re-opening should have been factually ascertained by legal evidence or conclusion before…

Sea Linkers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2297/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ M/S. Sea Linkers Private Acit 8(1)(2), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Bpt, Plot No. 107, M.K Road V. Quay Street, Darukhana, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aahcs5084N (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Deepak Tralshawala Revenue By: Shri. Manish Kumar Singh,Dr

…site belief Whether the materials would conclusively prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co, (P.) Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597 (Supreme Court): Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court).” 11. The above discussion and precedent from Apex Court fully justify the validity of reopening in this case. Further I find that the Ld. CIT(A) has carefully examined the issue and has properly appreciated the issue. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the sa…

Tanaya Gems & Jewellery Exports Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly confirm the addition. The ground is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3196/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

…taken by the following courts, I.Hiigh Court of Delhi in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.(2000)112 Taxman 337 2.SC in the case of Central Provinces Manganese ore co Ltd (1991) 191 ITR 662 3.SC in the case of Selected Dalurband Coal Co P Ltd (1996) 217 ITR 597 (x) The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the recent decisions in the following cases while dealing with bogus purchase/loans issues in the case of Praveen Jain group and others has ruled that the initiation of reassessment proceedings on the basis of survey operations is held valid even though there was scrutiny u/s 143(3). They opined that it wi…

Time Media & Entertainment LLP (Earlier Time Media & Entertainment Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 16(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6534/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Time Media & Income Tax Officer- Entertainment Llp (Earlier 16(1)(5) Time Media & R.No. 439, 4 Th Floor, V. Entertainment Private Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd.) M.K Marg, 104, Rachna, V.P Road, Mumbai-400020 Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaact1581C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Reepal G. Tralshawala Revenue By: Shri. D.G. Pansari (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 28.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 6534/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 31.07.2017, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”) In Appeal No. Cit(A)-4/It-89/Ito-16(1)(5)/2016-17, For Assessment Year 2010-11, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 30.03.2016 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2010-11. I.T.A. No.6534/Mum/2017

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6534/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Time Media & Income Tax Officer- Entertainment LLP (Earlier 16(1)(5) Time Media & R.No. 439, 4 th Floor, v. Entertainment Private Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd.) M.K Marg, 104, Rachna, V.P Road, Mumbai-400020 Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN: AAACT1581C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Shri. Reepal G. Tralshawal…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 23(1), Mumbai vs. Calvin Properties, Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. N. K. Pradhan, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6561, 6562 & 6564/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14)

…in the following cases, 1. High Court of Delhi in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.(2000)112 Taxman 337 2.SC in the case of Central Provinces Manganese or co. Ltd. (1991) 191 ITR 662 . 3..SC in the case of Selected Dalurbrand Coal Co tj Ltd (1996) 217 ITR 597 (xi) The Hon'ble High Court, of Bombay in the recent decisions in the following cases while dealing with bogus purchase/loans issues has ruled that the initiation of reassessment proceedings on the basis of survey operations, is held valid even though there was scrutiny u/s 143(3). They opined that it will not tantamount to change of opinion.-…

Nand Bhagwandas Motwani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(5), Kalyan

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5855/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SH. G. MANJUNATHA, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5855/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ITO ward 5(2) Nand Bhagwandas 2nd floor, Mohan Plaza, Motwani, बिधम/ Khadakpada, Kalyan Narain Niwas, Dudh Vs. Naka, Ulhasnagar, Mumbai-400 005 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. ABPPM2840L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Bhadresh Doshi, AR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Ms. Bharti Singh, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 07.01.2019 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 03.04.2019 Dat…

Shri Chandan Dhingadmal Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-19(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am

…site belief Whether the materials would conclusively prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co, (P.) Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597 (Supreme Court): Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court).” 12. The above discussion and precedent from Apex Court fully justify the validity of reopening in this case. Further I find that the Ld. CIT(A) has carefully examined the issue and has properly appreciated the issue. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the s…

M/S. Bhansali Metal & Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

…site belief Whether the materials would conclusively prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co, (P.) Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597 (Supreme Court): Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court).” 9. The above discussion and precedent from Apex Court fully justify the validity of reopening in this case. Since, the issue has been decided on the basis of the Hon’ble Apex Court decision, the other case laws referred by assessee are not supporting the asse…

Hemang Hasmukhray Doshi (Prop. of Minolta Chem), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 27(1)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

…site belief Whether the materials would conclusively prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co, (P.) Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597 (Supreme Court): Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court).” 14. The above discussion and precedent from Apex Court fully justify the validity of reopening in this case. Since, the issue has been decided on the basis of the Hon’ble Apex 7 Court decision, the other case laws referred by assessee are not supporting the a…

Sanjay Kailash Gupta, Kalyan vs. ITO WD 3(4), Kalyan

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7077/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Sanjay Kailash Gupta The Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 707, A7, Kingstone Yogidham, Ward 3(4), Kalyan Murbad Road, Shop No. 1, 2, 3, Kasturigram Society, Rani Mansion, Kalyan (West) Vs. Khadakpada, Kalyan (West) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Adtpg 0574 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Aarju Garodia सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 04.06.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 02.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Thane Dated 13.07.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Issue Raised Is That Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 12.5 % Of Bogus Purchase.

…site belief Whether the materials would conclusively prove the escapement is not the concern at that stage. This is so because the formation of belief by the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co, (P.) Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597 (Supreme Court): Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court).” 11. The above discussion and precedent from Hon’ble Apex Court fully justify the validity of reopening in this case. The assessee has also raised some other issue relating to reasons for reopening. We find that these grounds were neither raised before the Asse…