Nickunj Eximp Enterprise v. ACIT

48 Taxmann.com 20High Court2014#4869 most cited

What is Nickunj Eximp Enterprise v. ACIT authority for?

Reopening of assessment is justifiable if the genuineness of purchase bills was not the subject matter of the original assessment under section 143(3) and was discovered to be bogus subsequently, for instance, during a survey.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Nickunj Eximp Enterprise v ACIT · section 143(3) · section 147 · reassessment · bogus purchase bills · survey · genuineness of bills · escaped income

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 37(1)Section 69BSection 69CSection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 147(b)section 147(1)section 147(a)third party informationsection 43cafresh tangible materialpermanent account numberviolation of natural justicenon application of mindsurvey under section 133asection 40a(2)live link

Judgments citing Nickunj Eximp Enterprise v. ACIT

ITO 19(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Babulal U Munot, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4506/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4506/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) The Ito-19(1)(2), Mumbai, बिधम/ Shri Babulal U Munot 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Prop. M/S. Steel Samrat Vs. (India) Flat No. 1901-A, 19Th Tardeo Road, Mumbai- 400007 Floor, Shreepati Tower, A Wing, Tatya Gharpure Path, Girgaon Mumbai-04 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aftpm5429H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri T. A. Khan (Dr) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.03.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11.05.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 15.05.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -30, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “(1) Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Restricting The Addition To The Extent Of 7.5% Of Non-Genuine Purchase Claimed By The Assessee A.Y.2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T. A. Khan (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69C

…nnot be said to be applicable in this case. Similarly, decision of the Hon'ble High Court in Nikunj Eximp (ITA No. 5604 of 2010) was rendered on the 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'ble Bombay High Court on the very same issue of obtaining bogus bills dismissed the assesses writ petition filed against notice u/s. 148. 2.4.15 Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Killick Nixon Ltd- v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2012] 20 5 A.Y.2010-11 taxmann.com 703 (Bom) was similarly faced with the question of…

Kaviraj Construction, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue as well as assessee are hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 1327/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ajgaonkar (AR)For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)

…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 (Born), Hon’ble Bombay High Court on the very same issue of obtaining bogus bills dismissed the assesses Writ Petition filed against notice u/s. 148. In this regard, it is apt to refer to decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. 355 1TR 290 (Guj) where the Hon’ble Court was similarly battling with the findi…

Satish R. Rathod, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 567/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Suresh AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar (SR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 69C

…xistent. 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 assesses Writ Petition filed against notice u/S. 148 of the Act. 5.9 The: appellant in his submissions also relied upon the Hon'ble JTAT, Mumba, decision in the case of Rajeev Kalathit vs. DCIT ITA No 6727/M/2012. In the case of Rajeev Hon'ble Trib…

Kiran Navin Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO -23(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 2601/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Saktijit Deysmt. Kiran Navin Doshi Income Tax Officer-23(2)(4) D-705, Kalp Nagri C-10, Pratyksha Kar Bhavan Vs. B.R. Road, Mulund (W) Bkc, Bandra East Mumbai 400080 Mumbai Pan – Abwpd5848A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Milind Rajguru
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member Smt. Kiran Navin Doshi Income Tax Officer-23(2)(4) D-705, Kalp Nagri C-10, Pratyksha Kar Bhavan Vs. B.R. Road, Mulund (W) BKC, Bandra East Mumbai 400080 Mumbai PAN – ABWPD5848A Appellant Respondent Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Milind Rajguru Date of Hearing: 11.01.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 18.01.2017 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)- 40, Mumbai dated 10.02.2016 for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The…