Nickunj Eximp Enterprise v. ACIT

BALAJI BUILLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC- 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/S Balaji Bullion & Dcit Central Circle-7(1), Commodities (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Vs. House Zaveri Baazar, Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aadcb 0236 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. N.M. Porwal Assessee By Revenue By : Mr. S. Srinivasu, Cit-Dr : 27/03/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 03/04/2024

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/s Balaji Bullion & DCIT Central Circle-7(1), Commodities (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. 118/120, 3rd floor, Ashoka Vs. House Zaveri Baazar, Mumbai-400 002. PAN NO. AADCB 0236 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. N.M. Porwal Assessee by Revenue by : Mr. S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR : 27/03/2024 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 03/04/2024 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 28.03.2018 passed by…

NAGPUR POWER & INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T.-3(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Nagpur Power & Industries Ltd V. Acit – 3(2)(2) 20Th Floor, Nirmal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacn5438N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Surinder Mehra Department Represented By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade & Shri Chetan Kacha

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Nagpur Power & Industries Ltd v. ACIT – 3(2)(2) 20th Floor, Nirmal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACN5438N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Surinder Mehra Department Represented by : Dr. Mahesh Akhade & Shri Chetan Kacha Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the asses…

KEYSTONE REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…sclosure of such transactions at the time of original assessments cannot be said to be disclosure of "true" and "full facts" of the case and hence ITOS jurisdiction to reopen such concluded assessment was held as justifiable. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise v/s ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC). Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original assessment u/s 143(3) and these bills being bogus was discovered subsequently to 143(3) during survey. Sohar Siraj Lokhandwala v/s ACIT (77 Taxman 307) Bombay H.C: Mere submissions of documents in the original assessment but not disclosing full & true facts…

KHANGARAM K DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

…lloys have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had escaped. 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) -Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject mat…

KHANGARAM K. DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

…lloys have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had escaped. 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) -Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject mat…

KHANGARAM K. DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

…lloys have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had have formed opinion that there was reason to believe that income had escaped. 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) 2. Nickunj Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) -Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject mat…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PHULCHAND EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 7214, 7212 & 7213/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12) DCIT – 3(2)(2) v. M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 674, 6th Floor 254B, 4th Floor, Nirlon House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Annie Besant Road Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai - 400030 PAN: AAACP2529C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No. 746/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2009-10) ACIT – 3(2)(2) v. M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 608 67, Bajaj Bhavan, Nariman Point Aayakar Bhavan, M.K…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PHULCHAND EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 7214, 7212 & 7213/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12) DCIT – 3(2)(2) v. M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 674, 6th Floor 254B, 4th Floor, Nirlon House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Annie Besant Road Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai - 400030 PAN: AAACP2529C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No. 746/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2009-10) ACIT – 3(2)(2) v. M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 608 67, Bajaj Bhavan, Nariman Point Aayakar Bhavan, M.K…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PHULCHAND EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 7214, 7212 & 7213/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12) DCIT – 3(2)(2) v. M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 674, 6th Floor 254B, 4th Floor, Nirlon House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Annie Besant Road Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai - 400030 PAN: AAACP2529C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No. 746/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2009-10) ACIT – 3(2)(2) v. M/s. Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 608 67, Bajaj Bhavan, Nariman Point Aayakar Bhavan, M.K…

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.

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE PRAMOD KUMAR, VP AND 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 तार…

MIRAH DEKOR PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 14, MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

…n this account.” 19. Learned CIT(A) further referred to following case laws :- • McDowell’s (154 ITR 148) (SC) • ITO Vs. Purshottam Das Bangur (90 Taxmann.com 541)(SC) • Phoolchand Bajrang Lal Vs. ITO (69 Taxman 627)(SC) • Nickunj Eximp Enterprises Vs. ACIT (48 Taxmann.com 20(Bombay HC) • Sohar Siraj Lokhandwala Vs. ACIT (77 Taxman 302) (Bombay HC) • Yash Raj Films Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (15 Taxmann.com 275) (Bombay HC)” Apropos issue of bogus purchase :- 20. As noted above there was survey conducted by the Mumbai sales tax department as per information from sales tax department the assessee indulged in bogus purc…

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

…plicable in this case. Similarly, decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in Nikunj Eximp (ITA No. 5604 of 2010) was rendered on the issue whether any substantial question of law was involved in that case. In fact, in a later decision in Nikunj Eximp (2014) 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bom), Hon‟be Bombay High Court on the very same issue of obtaining us bills dismissed the assessee‟s Writ Petition filed against notice u/s . 148. 5.2.13 Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Killick Nixon Ltd, v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2012] 20 taxmann.com TOS (Bom.) was similarly faced with the question of sham transaction…

PALLAVI PANDEY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (CC) 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals hereinabove are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

…and "full facts" of the case and hence ITOs jurisdiction to reopen such concluded assessment was held as justifiable. 5 1.5 While rejecting assessees ground. I also rely on following case laws of jurisdictional High Court (i) Nickuni Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original assessment u/s 143(3) and these bills being bogus was discovered subsequently to 143(3) during survey. (ii) Sohar Siraj. Lokhandwala vs ACIT (77 Taxman 302) Bombay H.C. Mere submissions of documents in the original assessment but not disclosing 'full & true f…

SHRI. RAJENDRA CHATURVEDI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2 (3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals hereinabove are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

…and "full facts" of the case and hence ITOs jurisdiction to reopen such concluded assessment was held as justifiable. 5 1.5 While rejecting assessees ground. I also rely on following case laws of jurisdictional High Court (i) Nickuni Eximp Enterprise vs ACIT 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bombay HC) Since genuineness of purchase bills was not subject matter of original assessment u/s 143(3) and these bills being bogus was discovered subsequently to 143(3) during survey. (ii) Sohar Siraj. Lokhandwala vs ACIT (77 Taxman 302) Bombay H.C. Mere submissions of documents in the original assessment but not disclosing 'full & true f…

ACIT 28(1), MUMBAI vs. MR. JAISINGH PATEL (PROP SEPARATION ENGINEERS (INDIA)), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Sri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2996/Mum/2019 (निर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2009-10)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “SMC”न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री शमीम याहया, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 2996/Mum/2019 (निर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2009-10) The Asst. Commissioner of Mr. Jaisingh Patel Income-tax, Ward 28(1) [Prop. Separation Engineers Room No.306, 3 r d Floor, 6 th (India)] बिाम/ Tower, Vashi Railway Station C6/6, 2:1, Sector-03, CBD Complex, Vashi, belapur, Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 703 Navi Mumbai-400604 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. AASPP4871E अपीलार्…

ITO 19 (1)(3), MUMBAI vs. GANPATRAJ NEMAL JAIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Sri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2730/Mum/2019 (निर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “SMC”न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री शमीम याहया, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 2730/Mum/2019 (निर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer -19(1)(3) Ganpatraj Nenmal Jain, Room No. 220, 2 nd Floor, Matru 10/1 Bhandari Street, 1 s t Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 Kumbharwad, Mumbai-04 बिाम/ 007 Vs. (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. AFNPJ0762Q अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Smita Verma, DR प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/ Respondent…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-11(3)(4), MUMBAI vs. WESTERN IMAGINARY TRANSCON PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kochar

…90 (8) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (9) Nikunj Eximp In ITA no. 5604 of 2010 (Bombay High Court); (10) Balaji Textiles 49 ITD 177 (Bom) (11) Rajeev G. Kalathil in ITA no. 6727/Mum/2012 and CO no. 06/Mum/2014 (12) Nikunj Eximp (2014) 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bom),. (13) Killick Nixon Ltd., vs DCIT (2012) 20 Taxmann.com 703 (Bom) (14) B.V vs. Union of India (2012) 204 Taxmann.com 408/ 17 Taxamann.com 202 (15) Union of India vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2004) 10 SCC 1 (16) Mathuram Agarwal v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1999) 8 SCC 667 (17) Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All.) (18)…

GIRISH NARAPATCHAND KANUNGO,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1587/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) बिाम/ Mr. Girish Narapatchand Ito 19(1)(3) Kanungo Matru Mandir, Prop. M/S. Tirupati Impex, Mumbai V. Flat No. 3, 2 Nd Floor, 5 Ramniwas Bldg, 2Nd Parsiwada Lane, Opp. V.P Road Police Station, Mumbai 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aoapk9201M (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Revenue By : Shri. C.S. Sharma सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1587/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 22.12.2016 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2009-10, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 10.03.2015 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 2009-10. I.T.A. No.1587/Mum/2017

…existent. This is not merely a case where the supplier has failed to appear before the Assessing Officer. Hence, the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court relied upon by the appellant would be of no help. In fact in a later decision In Nikunj Eximp (2014) 48 Taxmann.com 20 (Bom), Hon'ble Bombay High Court on the very same issue of obtaining bogus bills dismissed the assessee's Writ Petition filed against notice u/s. 148. The other cases cited in the submissions were also not applicable to the facts of the present case, in view of the fact that the appellant miserably failed to prove the genuineness of such pu…