How many judgments cite Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT?

460 judgments on BharatTax cite Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT (316 ITR 274), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153A, Section 68, Section 131, Section 133A, Section 115BBE, Section 153C.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT

316 ITR 274High Court2009#154 most cited

What is Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT authority for?

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

460

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sanjay Oilcake Industries · 316 ITR 274 · bogus purchases · unverifiable purchases · proportionate disallowance · profit element · section 68 · section 69B · section 131 · section 133A · estimation of income

Sections most often in play

Section 153A Section 68 Section 131 Section 133A Section 115BBE Section 153C Section 69B Section 143(3)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 69b section 292c section 292 section 44ab section 201 section 69c section 133a section 29 escapement of income section 145(3)section 131 commissioner (appeals)

Judgments citing Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT

Bhavna Sunil Joshi, Mumbai vs. ITO 32(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1579/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Bhavna Sunil Joshi, Income Tax Officer B-71, Bldg. No.4, 7Th Floor, Ward-32(1)(3), बनाम/ Rustom Regency, Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Vs. Dahisar (West), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400068 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aajpj6892N

…rting further, we deem it appropriate to consider various decisions from Hon'ble High Courts / Hon'ble Apex Court, 3 Bhavna Sunil Joshi so that we can reach to a fair conclusion. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sanjay Oilcakes Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.) held as under:- “11. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apparent that no interference is called for in the impugned order of the Tribunal dated April 29, 1994, read with the order dated September 29, 1994, made in miscellaneous application. In the principal order the Tribunal has recorded the fo…

Glow Metal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-26(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-

ITA 7172/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Glow Metal, The Ito 26(1)(5), A-5, Nandjyot Industrial Estate, Pratykshakar Bhavan, Saki Naka, Andheri-Kurla Road, C-10, Room No. 506, Mumbai - 400072 Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Pan: Aaafg3661K Mumbai - 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M. Subramanian (Ar) Revenue By : Ms. N. Hemalatha (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2018

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian (AR)For Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha (DR)

Section 133Section 143Section 147Section 148

…total amount of bogus purchases made by the AO. The Ld. DR further submitted that the Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 findings of the Ld. CIT (A) is based on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court delivered in the case of CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cakes 316 ITR 274 in which disallowance on account of bogus purchases in the case of manufacturer was sustained @ 25% of the total amount of bogus purchases. 12. We have perused the material on record in the light of the rival submissions. Enquiry conducted by the Sales Tax department had established that the parties, from whom the assessee had shown purchases, w…

Ajay Narayan Bhoir, Bhiwandi vs. ACIT Cir. 1, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5052/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Ajay Narayan Bhoir, Asst. Commissioner Of Vishnu Compound, Vs. Income Tax Circle-1, Assbibi, Kalyan Road, Kalyan. Bhiwandi-421302 Pan No. Aatpb1608A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. S.M. Makhija, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Vidhyadhar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. S.M. Makhija, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Vidhyadhar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…and made an addition of Rs.25,74,768/-. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision in Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. ACIT 58 ITD 428 (Ahd), Sanjay Oil Cakes Industries v. CIT (2008) 316 ITR 274 (Guj), restricted the disallowance to Rs.6,43,642/- (@ 25% of Rs.25,74,568/-). Shri Ajay Narayan Bhoir 4 6. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee vide the grounds of appeal submits that (i) the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the AO not providing documentary evidence and cross-examination of the so-called hawala dealer or bogus…

Ion Exchange Waterleau Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5209/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Ion Exchange Waterleau Ltd Ito-6(3)(2), Ion House, 4Th Floor, Dr. E. Room No.503, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Moses Road, Mahalakshmi, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400011 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabci4403P "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri R.R.V.Raghavan राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai-Dr

…on record. Before adverting further, we deem it appropriate to consider various decisions from Hon'ble High Courts / Hon'ble Apex Court, so that we can reach to a fair conclusion. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sanjay Oilcakes Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.) held as under:- “11. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apparent that no interference is called for in the impugned order of the Tribunal dated April 29, 1994, read with the order dated September 29, 1994, made in miscellaneous application. In the principal order the Tribunal has recorded the f…

DCIT Cir 2, Kalyan vs. Jayprakash N Lakhani, Ulhasnagar

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 924/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Shri Jayprakash N Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Vs. Lakhani, F-212, Udyog Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Vihar, Near Vithal Wadi, Plaza, Khadakpada, Ulhasnagar-421003 Wayale Nagar, Kalyan (W),- 421301 Pan No. Aakpl5145M Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 21/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/04/2018

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…s relied upon by the appellant are not similar to the facts of the case of the appellant. The disallowance @ 25% out of unverifiable purchases from unverifiable/Hawala dealer had been upheld in the aforesaid case: (1) Sanjay Oil Cake Industries vs. CIT (2003) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (2) Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs ACIT 58 ITD 428 (Abd) (3) M/s Nand Kishore Meghraj Jewellers, Jaipur CO. No. 105/JP/09 arising out of ITA No. 433/JP/2009 by ITAT Jaipur (4) M/s. Trident Jewellers ITAT Jaipur ITA No, 552/JP/2013. In view of the above stated facts, the disallowance @ 25% of Rs.1,88,18,660/- works out to Rs.47,04,665/- plus Rs,6,30…

Jitendra M Kitavat, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result,appeals filed by the AO are rejected and the appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 7049/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7049 & 7050/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ays: 2009-10 & 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan: Aabpk9960C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील संसंसंसं././././I.T.A./7099 & 7102/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.S: 2009-10 & 2007-08 अपील अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR

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

…es could not be overlooked,that the assessee had made purchases from some other parties probably in cash,that it had taken bills from the other parties to regularize the transactions.He referred to the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. (58ITD428), Sanjay Oil Cakes (316 ITR 274) and Simit P Seth (356ITR451)and held that once the sales were accepted by the AO the very basis of I.T.A./7049 & 7050/Mum/2016 I.T.A./7099 & 7102/Mum/2016: AYs: 2009-10 & 2007-08 Jitendra M. Kitavat purchases could not be questioned,that the entire purchase price could not be disallowed,that only the profit element embedded in such purchases co…

ITO 12(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Mehta Infocom P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3685/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am The Income Tax Officer, Ward Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. 12(3)(4), Room No. 147A, 1 St A/301, Atul Apartments, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aafcm2000E Mehta Infocom (P) Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, A/301, Atul Apartments, Ward 12(3)(4), Room No. Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 147A, 1St Floor, Aayakar Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Rajesh Chamaria, ARFor Respondent: V Justin, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

…ent. 5.4 It is noted that only profit element is liable to tax in such cases as was held in the case of 1. CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) (Guj) (HC). 2. CIT vs Simit P. Sheth (2013)(356 ITR 451 (Guj)(HC) 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (HC) 4. ITO vs. Permanand (2007) 107 TTJ 395 (Jd)(Trib) 5. Shri Madhukant B. Gandhi Vs. ITO ITA No. 1950/M/2009 Bench ‘B’ dt. 23-02-2010 (AY 2005-06) (Mum.) (Trib.). 6. Sanjeev Wooeln Mills Vs. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 434 (SC). 5.5 In view of the above discussion it is seen that the addition made by the A.O. on account of alleged bogus purch…

Mehta Infocom P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 12(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3429/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Rajesh Chamaria, ARFor Respondent: V Justin, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

Jivanlal Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2019/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Jivanlal Corporation Ito-13(3)(2) [Now 409, Western Edge-Ii, Western 17(2)(1)] Vs. Exp. Highway, Borivali (East), Mumbai. Mumbai-400066. Pan No. Aacfj3353K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bhupendra Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…chase transactions. However, since the assessee had disclosed the sales corresponding to the purchases, the AO observed that the entire amount of bogus purchases cannot be treated as unproved purchases. Thus he relied on the decision in Sanjay Oil Cake v. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and estimated disallowance @ 25% on the above alleged bogus purchases of Rs.2,37,69,470/- and made an addition of Rs.59,42,000/-. 4.3 Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and confirmed the addition of Rs.59,42,000/-. 4.4 Befo…

ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Jitendra Madanlal Kitawat (HUF), Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the AO is rejected and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7100/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7047/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat (Huf) Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan:Assesseebpk 9960 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7100/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat(Huf) Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

…s could not be overlooked,that the assessee had made purchases from some other parties probably in cash, that it had taken bills from the other parties to regularize the transactions.He referred to the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. (58ITD428), Sanjay Oil Cakes (316 ITR 274) and Simit P Seth (356ITR451)and held that once the sale was accepted by the AO the very basis of purchases could not be questioned,that the entire purchase price could not be disallowed,that only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the income of the assessee,that the estimation would vary with business to business.Fin…

Shri Anil Gaherilal Duggad, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-12, ( Presently Dy. CIT, Circle-6), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1087/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1087/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri Anil Gaherilal Duggad Acit, Cir.12 B/2, Harivadan Flat Vs (Presently Dcit, Cir.6) Nr. Boringwali Chawl Nehru Bridge Corner Maninagar Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 008. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Pipara, ARFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148

…sallowed only the profit element instead of the entire purchases. We notice from the case file that the assessee had quoted umpteen number of judicial precedents in this regard. Hon'ble jurisdictional high court's decision in Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) supports this latter plea. We are therefore of the view that larger interest of justice would be served in case only the profit element @15% in the above bogus purchases is disallowed/added rather than the entire amount. Whilst concluding so, it is made clear that we have duly taken into account the fact that the assessee is a trader than m…

Chirag Rajendra Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 24(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 4086/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4086 To 4088/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Mr. Chirag Rajendra Shah Ito, Ward 24(1)(4), 502, 5Th Floor, C-13, D-305, Siddhi Vinayak Tower, बनाम/ Off Tank Road, Orlem, Malad, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-64 Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afxps 7904 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. K. Sharma & Ms. Taneshka Sharma ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 69C

…on 06.04.2015 whereby the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP confirmed the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Gujarat High Court and other decisions of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 21. However, we note that this is not an appeal by the Revenue. Upon careful consideration we find that sales in these cases are not doubted. When sales are not d…

Simplex Metal & Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 222/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.222/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Simplex Metal & Alloys Ito-19(3)(3) Shop No. 25, Ground Floor, Room No. 202, Matru Mandir, बनाम/ Harharwala Building, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 Vs. Ardeshir Dady Street, S.V.P. Road, Near Alankar Cinema, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfs 5871 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 28.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 02.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 10.10.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2010- 11. 2. The Issue Raised Relates To The Validity Of Reopening & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.13,78,911/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…on 06.04.2015 whereby the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP confirmed the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Gujarat High Court and other decisions of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 15. Upon careful consideration I find that sales in these cases are not doubted. When sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchase is not sustainab…

M. B. Services, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 26(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 20/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 20/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M. B. Services Ito, Ward 26(2)(2), Siddha Sadab, 2Nd Floor, C/11, 7Th Floor, बनाम/ Flat No. 9-10, Plot No. 123A, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Sion Matunga Scheme Road No. 24A, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 Sion (West), Mumbai-400 022 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 27.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 02.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 27.10.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2010- 11. 2. The Issue Raised Is That The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Sustaining 100% Of The Addition Amounting To Rs.10,25,048/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha

…on 06.04.2015 whereby the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP confirmed the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Gujarat High Court and other decisions of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 15. Upon careful consideration I find that sales in these cases are not doubted. When sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchase is not sustainab…

Asst CIT Cir 3, Kalyan vs. Rich & Royal, Kalyan

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed in the manner indicated above

ITA 1007/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1007/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Acit Cir 3 बिाम/ M/S. Rich & Royal 2N D Floor, Rani Mansion, The Raymond Shop, Murbad Road, Kalyan(W), Zojwalla Complex, V. Dist Thane 421301 Agra Road, Kalyan (W) 421301 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aadfr3357G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri. Saurabh Kumar Rai

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

…he facts of the present appeal before us, we deem it appropriate to consider various decisions from Hon'ble High Courts/Hon'ble Apex Court, so that we can reach to a proper conclusion. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sanjay Oilcakes Industries vs CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.) held as under:- “11. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apparent that no interference is called for in the impugned order of the Tribunal dated April 29, 1994, read with the order dated September 29, 1994, made in miscellaneous application. In the principal order the Tribunal has recorded the fol…

Mircon Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 10(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 47/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 47 & 48/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Mircon Infrastructure Private Limited Ito, Ward 10(2)(4), 505/506, Shalimar Morya Park, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 बनाम/ New Lind Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 053 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcm 1309 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha

Section 101Section 106Section 131

…on 06.04.2015 whereby the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP confirmed the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Gujarat High Court and other decisions of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 14. Upon careful consideration I find that sales in these cases are not doubted. When sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchase is not sustainab…

Asst CIT 14(1), Mumbai vs. Anil Dhanraj Murpana, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2610/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit-14(1), Shri Anil Dhanraj Murpana, 02Nd Floor, Earnest House, 308, Adhyaru Industrial बनाम/ Nariman Point, Estate, New Sun Mill Vs. Mumbai-400021 Compound, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaapm7660G राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Dr "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By None

Section 69

…rting further, we deem it appropriate to consider various decisions from Hon'ble High Courts / Hon'ble Apex 3 Anil Dhanraj Murpana Court, so that we can reach to a fair conclusion. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sanjay Oilcakes Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.) held as under:- “11. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apparent that no interference is called for in the impugned order of the Tribunal dated April 29, 1994, read with the order dated September 29, 1994, made in miscellaneous application. In the principal order the Tribunal has recorded the fo…

DCIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Ajay Arvindbhai Khatri, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2278/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-25(1), M/S Ajay Arvindbhai Khatri, Room No.202, 02Nd Floor, 30/31, Borivali Shopping बनाम/ Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Centre, Chandavarkar Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Borivali (West), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400092 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaefa7242G Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By M/S. Dinkel Hariya

Section 69C

…n record. Before adverting further, we deem it appropriate to consider various decisions from Hon'ble High Courts / Hon'ble Apex Court, so that we can reach to a fair conclusion. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sanjay Oilcakes Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.) held as under:- “11. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apparent that no interference is called for in the impugned order of the Tribunal dated April 29, 1994, read with the order dated September 29, 1994, made in miscellaneous application. In the principal order the Tribunal has recorded the fo…

Vishal Tube Industries, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 6527/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6527/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Vishal Tube Industries Ito-19(3)(5), 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Badrika Ashram Building, बनाम/ Ground Floor, 92, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 Nanubhai Desai Road, Vs. Dhetwadi Main Road, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadfv 5562 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 26.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 26.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 25.09.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Issue Raised Relates To The Validity Of Reopening Of Assessment & Addition @ 12.50% Of Alleged Bogus Purchases.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…on 06.04.2015 whereby the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP confirmed the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Gujarat High Court and other decisions of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 17. Upon careful consideration I find that sales in these cases are not doubted. When sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchase is not sustainab…

ITO WD 2(4), Thane vs. Parth Traders, Thane

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal and assessee's cross objection are dismissed and the assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4735/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4735/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito, Ward 2(4) M/S. Parth Traders Room No. 12, 6Th Floor, 63, Mira Co-Op. Hsg. Society, बनाम/ Ashar It Park, Wagle Indl. Estate, Near Asmita Super Market, Vs. Road No.16Z, Thane-400 604 Naya Nagar, Mira Road (E), Thane-401 107 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabfp 4130 F (Revenue) (Assessee) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5211/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & ""या"ेपक सं./Co No. 157/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 4735/Mum/2015) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बनाम/ M/S. Parth Traders Ito, Ward 2(4) Thane-401 107 Thane-400 604 Vs. (Assessee) (Revenue) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Pooja Swarop ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. P. Mehta सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 20.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 22.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee & Cross Objection By The Assessee Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 11.06.2015 & Pertain To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2 M/S. Parth Traders 2. In The Revenues Appeal, The Issue Raised Is That The Ld. Commissioner Of Income

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja SwaropFor Respondent: Shri G. P. Mehta

Section 133(6)

…on 06.04.2015 whereby the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP confirmed the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Gujarat High Court and other decisions of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, the parties are bound by the principle of law pronounced in the aforesaid three judgments. 14. Upon careful consideration we find that sales in this case have not been doubted. As held by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (i…