PCIT v. Vaman International (P) Ltd.

422 ITR 520High Court2020#4216 most cited

What is PCIT v. Vaman International (P) Ltd. authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot make additions for bogus purchases solely based on third-party statements without conducting independent inquiries and providing the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Vaman International · section 147 · bogus purchases · independent inquiry · third party statements · cross-examination · natural justice · opportunity to assessee

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 133(6)Section 69CSection 234BSection 234CSection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)third party informationsection 41section 40a(3)sundry creditorssection 145(3)preponderance of probabilityloose paperssection 40asearch assessmentsection 69csection 131

Judgments citing PCIT v. Vaman International (P) Ltd.

Infinity Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2398/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2008-09
Section 144Section 145(3)

…not produced by the assessee, would that make the transaction of purchase made by the assessee invalid? Similar issue was subject matter of adjudication by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Vaman International (P) Ltd. Reported in 422 ITR 520. The M/s. Infinity Industries Pvt. Ltd. substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court are reproduced hereunder:- “(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Tribunal was justified in holding that provisions of a 69C of the IT Act, 1961 are not applicable in case of…

Infinity Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2397/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2007-08
Section 144Section 145(3)

…not produced by the assessee, would that make the transaction of purchase made by the assessee invalid? Similar issue was subject matter of adjudication by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Vaman International (P) Ltd. Reported in 422 ITR 520. The M/s. Infinity Industries Pvt. Ltd. substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court are reproduced hereunder:- “(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Tribunal was justified in holding that provisions of a 69C of the IT Act, 1961 are not applicable in case of…

Infinity Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2396/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2011-12
Section 144Section 145(3)

…not produced by the assessee, would that make the transaction of purchase made by the assessee invalid? Similar issue was subject matter of adjudication by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Vaman International (P) Ltd. Reported in 422 ITR 520. The M/s. Infinity Industries Pvt. Ltd. substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court are reproduced hereunder:- “(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Tribunal was justified in holding that provisions of a 69C of the IT Act, 1961 are not applicable in case of…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Shri Abhishek L. Jain, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 344/SRT/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.344/Srt/2019 (Ay 2007-08) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Abhishek L.Jain 2(3)(7), Room No. 414, 4Th Prop Of Manglam Export, Vs Floor, Anavil Business Centre, 302, Pipla Sheri, Adajan-Hajira Road, Mahidharpura, Adajan, Surat-395003 Pan : Abxpj 0344 G Surat-395009 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…ACIT vs. Vardhman Exports TA No.265/2008 (Guj)  CIT vs. M.K. Brothers 163 ITR 249 (Guj)  ACIT vs. Akruti Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. TA No.997/2008 (Guj)  CIT Vs Nangalia Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. 40 taxmann.com 206 (Guj)  PCIT vs. Vaman International Pvt. 422 ITR 520 (Bom)  PCIT vs. Md. Haji Adam & Co. & Ors. 104 CCH 391 (Bom)  H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT 289 ITR 561 (Bom)  CIT vs. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 372 ITR 619 (Bom)  Haryana Jwellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO [ITA No. 2315/Del/2018 (Delhi. Trib)]  Gopinath Gems vs. ITO [ITA No.624-629/SRT/2018 (Surat Trib.)]  Pankaj K Jain HUF vs. ITO [269/SRT/2017 (Su…

Amit Ashok Golwala, Mumbai vs. ITO - 25 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7265/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
Section 145Section 148

…e Assessing Officer was not legally correct and it should not have been confirmed by learned CIT(A). In this regard assessee placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 422 ITR 520. The Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Mohommad Haji Adm & Co. (ITA No. 1004 of 2016 dated 11.2.2019) wherein Hon'ble Bombay High Court has upheld the decision of the Tribunal in restricting the addition to the extent of gross profit rate on purchases. 4. On the con…

M/S. Paras Plastic Processors, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-27(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5593/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Paras Plastic Processors, Income Tax Officer 806/807, Ajit Nath, Ward-27(2)(5), Nilkantha Enclave, Ajit Nagar, Vs. Vashi, Opp. Shreyash Cinema, Navi Mumbai-400-703. Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400086. Pan No. Aaefp 8206 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Nair, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s Paras Plastic Processors, Income Tax Officer 806/807, Ajit Nath, Ward-27(2)(5), Nilkantha Enclave, Ajit Nagar, Vs. Vashi, Opp. Shreyash Cinema, Navi Mumbai-400-703. LBS Marg, Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400086. PAN No. AAEFP 8206 H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. M. Subramanian, AR Revenue by : Ms. Smita Nair, DR Date of Hearing : 20/06/2022 Date of pronouncement : 27/07/2022 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by…

M/S J. Kumar Infraprojects Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3449/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. J. Kumar Dy. Cit, Infraprojects Ltd., Central Circle-5(1), 16A, Andheri Industrial Mumbai Estate, Vs. Veera Desasi Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaacj9161C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jt. Cit (Osd) Cc-5(1), M/S. J. Kumar R.No.1926, Infraprojects Ltd., 19Th Floor, 16A, Andheri Industrial Air India Bldg., Vs. Estate, Nariman Point, Veera Desasi Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaacj9161C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. K Shivaram, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jacinta Zimik Vashai, D.R
Section 37(1)Section 69C

…ainst the High Court Order has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in (2018) 256 taxmann.com 213 (SC). Similarly, the assessee relied on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 422 ITR 520 (Bom) (HC) and also on the co-ordinate benches of the Tribunal in the case of Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation vs. DCIT (2017) 84 taxmann.com 51 (Mumbai) and Pravesh Kejriwal vs. ITO 16 ITA No.3449/M/2019 & ors. M/s. J. Kumar Infraprojects Ltd. (2019) 101 taxmann.com 170 (Kolkata-Trib.). The Ld. A.R. also made a without prejudice conten…

Hbn Netowrk P.Ltd, Thane vs. DCIT 15(3)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly the ground raised by the assessee in ground No. 1, 2 is allowed

ITA 3012/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3012/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ly to the customers through e-portal. On merits, relied on the following case laws of the jurisdictional High Court of Mumbai in the cases of PCIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Ltd. (2020) 423 ITR 220 (Bom) (HC) and PCIT v. Vaman International Pvt. Ltd (2020) 422 ITR 520 (Bom) (HC). 12. On the other hand, learned DR submitted that the reopening of the assessment was made based on the information from external agencies therefore the reopening of the assessment 13 I.T.A. No. 3012/Mum/2017 HBN Networks Pvt. Ltd. is proper and with regard to merits of the case he relied in the orders of CIT(A) and AO. 13. Consider…