PCIT v. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co.

103 Taxmann.com 459High Court2019#688 most cited

What is PCIT v. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co. authority for?

Where purchases are found to be bogus, the profit element embedded in such purchases is to be brought to tax, not the entire purchase value. An addition for non-genuine purchases may be justified.

146

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co. · 103 Taxmann.com 459 · bogus purchases · non-genuine purchases · profit element addition · business income

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 143(3)Section 69CSection 133(6)Section 148Section 132(4)Section 131Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

gaarsection 194qsection 245hsection 158bb(1)section 245csection 131(1)section 269tthird party informationsection 245d(4)explanation to section 37statement under section 132(4)full and true disclosure

Judgments citing PCIT v. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co.

Late Shri Mahabir Prasad(Legal Heir Ms. Parul Kansaria), Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 411/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153D

…ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 1 of 40 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, Bengaluru BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. By Assessee & AY ITA No 411/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2019-20) Co No 6/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2017-18) BY Assessing Officer ITA no 170/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2018-19) Assessee Late Shri Mahabir Prasad Through his Legal heir Mrs Parul Kansaria No 11186, Prestige Shantiniketan ITPL, Main Road, Whitefield, Bengaluru PAN AGYPP1344G Assessing Officer The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 (3), Bengaluru Third…

Late Shri Mahabir Prasad(Legal Heir Ms. Parul Kansaria), Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 410/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153D

…ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 1 of 40 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, Bengaluru BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. By Assessee & AY ITA No 411/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2019-20) Co No 6/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2017-18) BY Assessing Officer ITA no 170/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2018-19) Assessee Late Shri Mahabir Prasad Through his Legal heir Mrs Parul Kansaria No 11186, Prestige Shantiniketan ITPL, Main Road, Whitefield, Bengaluru PAN AGYPP1344G Assessing Officer The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 (3), Bengaluru Third…

DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Baengaluru vs. Late Shri Mahabir Prasad(Legal Heir Ms. Parul Kansaria), Bengaluru

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

ITA 169/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153D

…ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 1 of 40 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, Bengaluru BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. By Assessee & AY ITA No 411/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2019-20) Co No 6/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2017-18) BY Assessing Officer ITA no 170/Bengaluru/2024 (AY 2018-19) Assessee Late Shri Mahabir Prasad Through his Legal heir Mrs Parul Kansaria No 11186, Prestige Shantiniketan ITPL, Main Road, Whitefield, Bengaluru PAN AGYPP1344G Assessing Officer The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 (3), Bengaluru Third…

Arham Star, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(2)(2), Piramal Chamber

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2427/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Arham Star Income-Tax Officer, Cw-2090, Bharat Diamond Ward - 19(2)(2), Bourse, Bandra Kurla Mumbai Vs. Complex, Mumbai - 400051 (Pan: Aaafs5695M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Rahul Sarda, Advocate Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1075308198(1), Dated 30/03/2025 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, 19(1)(1), Mumbai, U/S.144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 22.12.2017 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Nfac Failed To Appreciate That The Purchases Made By The Appellant Were Genuine & Supported By Documentary Material Including The Corroboration Of Sales Made From Such Purchases & There Was Not Material To Show That The Purchases Were Not Genuine & Hence, The Same Could Not Have Been Disallowed. 2. The Nfac Erred In Upholding The Addition On The Basis Of Generalized Statements In The Assessment Order Without The Assessing Officer Having Conducted Any Enquiry In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Sarda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arham Star Income-tax Officer, CW-2090, Bharat Diamond Ward - 19(2)(2), Bourse, Bandra Kurla Mumbai Vs. Complex, Mumbai - 400051 (PAN: AAAFS5695M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Rahul Sarda, Advocate Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by assessee is against the order of CIT (A), National Fa…

Smt. Reeta Goel, Muzaffarnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Muzaffarnagar

ITA 4258/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…1 Smt. Reeta Goel IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2021-22 Income Tax Officer, Vs Reeta Goel, Muzaffarnagar. Near Arihant Lane Meerut Road Muzaffarnagar-251002 PAN: ACTPG 3961 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT AND Assessment Year: 2021-22 Reeta Goel, Vs Income Tax Officer, Near Arihant Lane Meerut Road Muzaffarnagar. Muzaffarnagar-251002 PAN: ACTPG 3961 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Ankit Gupta, Adv. Department represented by Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT (DR) Date…

Income Tax Officer, Muzaffarnagar vs. Reeta Goel, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 4094/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…1 Smt. Reeta Goel IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2021-22 Income Tax Officer, Vs Reeta Goel, Muzaffarnagar. Near Arihant Lane Meerut Road Muzaffarnagar-251002 PAN: ACTPG 3961 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT AND Assessment Year: 2021-22 Reeta Goel, Vs Income Tax Officer, Near Arihant Lane Meerut Road Muzaffarnagar. Muzaffarnagar-251002 PAN: ACTPG 3961 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Ankit Gupta, Adv. Department represented by Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT (DR) Date…

Rasiklal Lavchand Vora, Thane vs. ACIT - Central Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5983/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 44ASection 69C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3770/Mum/2025 A.Y: 2010-11 ITO – 19(1)(5) Vs Jawahar Pravinchand Room No. 502, 5th Floor, Sarkar, Piramal chambers, Parel, 3rd Floor, Giriraj, Mumbai. Khotachi Wadi, VP Road, Mumbai. PAN – AACPS7897M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Smt. Smitha V. Nair, CIT DR Date of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal hs been filed by the revenue challenging the impugned order dt. 13.03.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income…

Rasiklal Vora, Thane vs. ACIT - Central Circle -1, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5982/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 44ASection 69C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3770/Mum/2025 A.Y: 2010-11 ITO – 19(1)(5) Vs Jawahar Pravinchand Room No. 502, 5th Floor, Sarkar, Piramal chambers, Parel, 3rd Floor, Giriraj, Mumbai. Khotachi Wadi, VP Road, Mumbai. PAN – AACPS7897M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Smt. Smitha V. Nair, CIT DR Date of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal hs been filed by the revenue challenging the impugned order dt. 13.03.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income…

Rasiklal Vora, Thane vs. ACIT, Central 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5981/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 44ASection 69C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3770/Mum/2025 A.Y: 2010-11 ITO – 19(1)(5) Vs Jawahar Pravinchand Room No. 502, 5th Floor, Sarkar, Piramal chambers, Parel, 3rd Floor, Giriraj, Mumbai. Khotachi Wadi, VP Road, Mumbai. PAN – AACPS7897M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Smt. Smitha V. Nair, CIT DR Date of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal hs been filed by the revenue challenging the impugned order dt. 13.03.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income…

Assistant Commissioner-19(1), Mumbai vs. Kdm Impex, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed, in terms of our

ITA 3040/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3040/Mum/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-19(1), Mumbai ........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Kdm Impex 506, 5Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbag, Mumbai-400 012 Pan : Aadfk2444F ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 2 Acit-19(1), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Kdm Impex

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. DR
Section 37Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ मुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.3040/MUM/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-19(1), Mumbai ........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. KDM Impex 506, 5th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbag, Mumbai-400 012 PAN : AADFK2444F ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 2…

Income Tax Officer 23(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Chinar Gems, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-appeal for the

ITA 2240/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Sanjukta SamantaraFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr.DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to the same rate as that of the other purchases. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue, held that the onus of proving the genuineness…

ITO 23(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Chinar Gems, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-appeal for the

ITA 2236/MUM/2025[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Sanjukta SamantaraFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr.DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to the same rate as that of the other purchases. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue, held that the onus of proving the genuineness…

Chinar Gems, Bg Kher Road Worli, Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 23(1)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber

In the result, the cross-appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

ITA 1440/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Sanjukta SamantaraFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr.DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to the same rate as that of the other purchases. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue, held that the onus of proving the genuineness…

Chinar Gems, Bg Kher Road Worli, Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 23(1)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber

In the result, the cross-appeal for the

ITA 1439/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Sanjukta SamantaraFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, (Sr.DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to the same rate as that of the other purchases. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue, held that the onus of proving the genuineness…

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Ramchandra Keshav and Company, Mumbai

In the result, grounds of appeal of revenue

ITA 2210/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Hybrid Hearing) Acit – 19(3), Mumbai Ramchandra Keshav & Company Room No. 513, 5Th Floor, Vs 53, Mohan Building, 162, J.S.S. Road, Piramal Chamber, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400004. Mumbai – 400012. [Pan: Aaafr1124J] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Hybrid hearing) ACIT – 19(3), Mumbai Ramchandra Keshav & Company Room No. 513, 5th Floor, Vs 53, Mohan Building, 162, J.S.S. Road, Piramal Chamber, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400004. Mumbai – 400012. [PAN: AAAFR1124J] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee by Ms. Swati Kamat, Advocate (Virtually) Revenue by Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR Date of Institution 28.03.2025 Date of hearing 14.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 05.08.2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. T…

Rajesh Gokulchand Agrawal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-41(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal

ITA 2257/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Gokulchand Agrawal Ito, Ward-41(3)(3), G.M. Enterprises, 24,Old Hanuman Vs Kautilyabhavan, Bandrakurla Lane, Kalbadevi Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400002. Mumbai-400051. [Pan No. Aawpa9648Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 254(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Physical hearing) Rajesh Gokulchand Agrawal ITO, Ward-41(3)(3), G.M. Enterprises, 24,Old Hanuman Vs KautilyaBhavan, BandraKurla Lane, Kalbadevi Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400002. Mumbai-400051. [PAN No. AAWPA9648Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala CA Revenue by Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. DR Date of Institution 31.03.2025 Date of hearing 26.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 23.07.2025 Order under section 254(1) of Inc…

Bharatkumar Ramchandraji Modi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by assessee is partly

ITA 6545/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh&Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Bharat Kumar Ramchandraji Modi Ito, Ward-19(1)(2), Mumbai 615, 6Th Floor, Plot 89/91, Durgadevi Vs Matru Mandir, 2Nd Floor, Street, Durgadevi Udyan, Tardeo Road, Kumbharwada, Girgoan, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai-400004. [Pan No. Apcpm0011N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 250Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER &GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Physical hearing) Bharat Kumar Ramchandraji Modi ITO, Ward-19(1)(2), Mumbai 615, 6th Floor, Plot 89/91, Durgadevi Vs Matru Mandir, 2nd Floor, Street, Durgadevi Udyan, Tardeo Road, Kumbharwada, Girgoan, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai-400004. [PAN No. APCPM0011N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Akash Prajapati, AR Revenue by Shri Rajesh Meshram, Sr. DR Date of hearing 27.03.2025 Date of pronouncement 28.05.2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAW…

ITO-41(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Mulchand Ramajor Gupta, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 493/MUM/2025[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2025

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 493 /MUM/ 2025(AY: 2011-12 ) (Physical hearing) ITO-41 (1)(3) Vs. Mulchand Ramajor Gupta Room No. 830 B, 2, Geeta Bhavan, Laxmi 8th Floor, Kautilya Narayan Mandir Road, Sakinaka, Andheri East, Bhavan,BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400072. PAN: AEEPG6038 C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Haridash Bhat CA/ AR Revenue by Shri. Vijay Kr. G. Subramanyam, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL…

DCIT-C-6(2), Mumbai vs. Samira Habitats India Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objection by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 5714/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.5714/Mum/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 250

…decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to the same rate as that of the other purchases. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue, held that the onus of proving the genuineness…

DCIT-C-6(2), Mumbai vs. Samira Habitats, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

ITA 5710/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 250

…decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v/s Simit P Sheth, reported in [2013] 356 ITR 451 (Guj.). The Tribunal, in further appeal, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Haji Adam, reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom.), dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and directed the AO to restrict the addition to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate of disputed purchases to the same rate as that of the other purchases. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue, held that the onus of proving the genuineness…