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 367,154 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

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Hind Industries Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3535/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kambledcit Vs Hind Industries Ltd. Circle 11(1) A-1, Phase-1, Okhla New Delhi Industrial Area New Delhi (Appellant) Aaach0870N (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 40A(3)Section 69C

…xmann.com 189 (Allahabad) " Prem Castings (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT2018-TIOL-274-S.C-IT " Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2018] 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bombay) " PCIT Vs.Birkam Singh [ ITA No. 55/2017] (Delhi) " Sanjay Olicake Industries Vs. CIT(A) [ 2009] 316 ITR 274 (Gujrat) " N. K. Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2016] 72 taxmann. Com 289 (Gujrat)/[2017] 292 CTR 354 (Gujarat) 6. As regards to Ground No. 1, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has not received any exempt income during the year under consideration. As regards to Ground No. 2, the Ld. AR submitted that all the export receipts are credited in the…

Smt. Vijaylaxmi Ramesh Upadhyay, Mumbai vs. ACIT-21(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4402/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: Shri Satish Modi, ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Kavita Kaushal

Section 147

…considering the facts of the present case and while relying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and also considering the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of SMC in assessee’s own case and to account for the profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize profit earned by assessee 7 I.T.A. No. 4402, 4403 & 4404/Mum/2018 Smt. Vijalaxmi Ramesh Upad…

Harshad Fulchand Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee is dismissed

ITA 687/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathaita No.687 & 688/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Harshad Fulchand Sheth Vs. Ito-19(1)(5) Room No.215, 2Nd Floor 12-A Manek, 11 L.D. Ruparel Marg Matru Mandir Malabar Hill Tardeo Road Mumbai-400 006 Mumbai-400 007 Pan/Gir No.Aahps4577P (Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…goods, in that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entity amount covered under such purchase, but the profit elemnt embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). Such decision is also followed by this court in a judgment dated August 16,2011, in Tax Appeal No.673 of 2010 in the case of CIT v, KishorAmrutlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed," (emphasis supplied) 6.3.5 In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the judicial pronouncements cited above, what can be disallowed…

DCIT, Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai vs. Balaji Impex, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed whereas the revenue’s appeal stand dismissed

ITA 539/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Kisnadwala - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik - Ld.DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…Assessment Year :2010-11 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.539/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT-Central Circle – 4(2) M/s. Balaji Impex, Room No. 1918, 19th Floor 201, Vyapar Bhavan, 368/370 बनाम/ Air India Building Narshi Naka Street Nariman Point Katha Bazar (in front of Exim House) Vs. Mumbai – 400 021. Near Masjid Railway Station Masjid Bunder, Mu…

B Arvindkumar & Co., Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

The appeals stands dismissed

ITA 5959/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul Sarda- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik-Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69

…such bogus purchases which assessee would have earned by making purchases from unknown parties. Relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Bholanath Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. (355 ITR 290), Simit P.Sheth (38 Taxmann.com 385) and Sanjay Oil Cake Ind. (316 ITR 274), Ld. CIT(A) finally came to a conclusion that a reasonable estimation of profit was to be made against these purchases. Finding that the task force group for diamond industry constituted by the Government of India, after considering the BAP scheme, has recommended presumptive tax of 3% for manufacturing activity, Ld. CIT(A) estimated the additio…

Mukesh Samrathmal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7476/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Smt. Bhagyashree JainFor Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopati, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 145(3)

…t satisfied with the given details of purchases and by rejecting the books of accounts u/s 145(3) by applied rate of 12.5% on the said bogus purchases by following the decision of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 and Sanjay Oil Coke Industreis v. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274(Guj). 5. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO on the ground that the notice issued u/s 133(6) were not served as these suppliers were not found at the addresses given however while holding the order of AO, ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee might have purchased the goods from grey market thereby earning h…

Income Tax Officer 32(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.J J Timber Industries, Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5857/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5857/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Respondent: None

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…lying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs 5 I.T.A. No. 5857/Mum/2018 M/s J J Timber Industries Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and also considering the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of SMC in assessee’s own case and to account for the profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize profit earned by assessee against purchase of material in the grey market and undue benefit o…

ACIT-27(3), Mumbai vs. Rashmikant V. Shah, Mumbai

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

ITA 7409/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7409/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-27(3) बिधम/ Rashmikant V. Shah Room No.423, 4Th Floor, 310/12, Samuel Street, Vs. Room No.15, 2Nd Floor, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Station Complex, Vashi, Masjid (W), Mumbai- Mumbai-400703. 400003. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanps8580L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Akhtar Ali Ansari (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 08.10.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -25, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (AR)For Respondent: Shri Akhtar Ali Ansari (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…goods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase. but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this court in the case of Sanjay Oileake Industries v. CIT 120093 316 ITR 274 (G4j). Such decision is also followed by this court in a judgment dated August 16,2011, in Tax Appeal No.679 of 2010 in the case of CIT v. Kishor Amrutlal 8 A.Y.2009-10 Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed." (emphasis supplied).” 5.4.4 In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the judicial pronouncements cited above, what c…

ITO 29(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Ketan Dhirajlal Gada, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5560/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negi

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

…goods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this Court in the case ofSanjay Oilcake Industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). Such decision is also followed by this Court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. Kishor Amrutlal Pate/. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed". Similarly, in yet another decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 Taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Hon'ble…

I.T.O. - 31(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Jitendra S. Mamania, Mumbai

In the result, the impugned order is upheld and appeal of Revenue is dismissed sans merit

ITA 1133/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri G. Manjunatha: A.Y : 2009-10

For Appellant: Smt. Samatha MullamudiFor Respondent: Ms. Lajari K. Oswal

…stricted the addition to 25% of the alleged bogus purchases after considering facts of the case and decisions of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs ITO, [2015] 58 taxmann.com 44 (Gujarat) and Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT, 316 ITR 274 (Guj.). 3. Per contra, Smt. Samatha Mullamudi representing the Department vehemently defended the assessment order and prayed for reversing the finding of CIT(A). The learned DR submitted that the assessee has not been able to prove genuineness of purchases made and has failed to establish trail of goods. The assessee has entered into transactio…

Sanghvi Metals, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5879/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 5878 & 5879/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s. Sanghvi Metals v. Income Tax Officer – 19(3)(2) 72, C.P. Tank Road Matru Mandir, Tardev Road, Mumbai – 400 004 Mumbai – 400 007 PAN: AAAFS7992M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Ram Tiwari Date of Hearing : 19.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 29.10.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of the Ld. C…

Sanghvi Metals, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5878/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

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

Income Tax Officer 32(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Smt. Indu Hasmukh Panchal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5864/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 32(1)(5) V. Smt Indu Hasmukh Panchal Room No. 203, 2Nd Floor A/9/401, Siddharth Nagar C-11, Pratyakshakar Bhavan Katau Mills Compound Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Highway, Borivali (E) Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 066 Pan: Agspp7461Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Nikita Sanghavi Department By : Shri Ram Tiwari

For Appellant: Ms. Nikita SanghaviFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

…ods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this Court in the case of San jay Oilcake Industries Vs. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj). Such decision is also followed by this Court in a judgment dated 5 Smt Indu Hasmukh Panchal August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No. 679 of 2010 in the case of CIT vs. Kishor Amrutlal Patel In the result, tax appeal is dismissed". 6.1.29. The facts in the present case are similar to the facts in the above mentioned case. In the present case, th…

ACIT- 27 (3), Mumbai vs. Virtex Engineers, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5692/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiacit-27(3) Vs. Virtex Engineers Room No.423, 4Th Floor 3A, Ashirwad Building, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Govandi Road, Chembur Station Complex, Vashi Mumbai-400 071 Navi Mumbai-400 703 Pan/Gir No.Aaafv1343D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…d goods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase but the profit elment embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj). Such decision is also followed by this court in a judgment dated August 16, 2011, in Tax Appeal No.679 of 2010 in the case of CIT v. Kishor Amrutlal Patel. In the result, tax appeal is dismissed.” (emphasis supplied) 5.3.6 In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the judicial pronouncements cited above, what can be disallowed…

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Thane vs. Luke Martin Fernandes, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5336/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiito,Ward-1(4) Vs. Luke Martin Fernandes Room No.11 B-2/104, Raunak Park Chs 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park Ltd., Kokani Pada B-Wing, Wagle Industrial Pokharan Road No.2 Estate, Thane(W)-400 604 Thane West-400 606 Pan/Gir No.Aafpf7705G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…d out and there is no material to dislodge such findings. In this process the appellant saved on the sales-tax / VAT and enhanced his profit by manipulating the purchases On similar facts Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs Sanjay Oil Cake (2009) 316 ITR 274 and Bhole Nath 355 ITR 290 (Guj) who were manufacturer upheld disallowance of 25%. As the facts of the assessee's case are similar therefore it would be appropriate if 25% of the amount of unproved purchases of Rs 5,17,512 /-, amounting to Rs 1,29,376/- is disallowed. This addition will be over and above the profits shown by the appellant in his…

ITO -WD- 2(1), Thane vs. Arvind Ramgopal Saraf, Bhayander

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5429/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaa.Y : 2009-10 :

For Appellant: Shri Akhtar H. AnsariFor Respondent: Shri Radhakant Saraf

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y : 2009-10 : Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), vs. Shri Arvind Ramgopal Saraf Thane (Appellant) 2A, 202 Tirupati Darshan, Balaji Nagar, Bhayander (W) 401 101. PAN : AACPP2416K (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari Respondent by : Shri Radhakant Saraf Date of Hearing : 14/10/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 14/10/2019 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-3, Nashik (Camp office – Than…

ITO, Ward- 3 (5), Kalyan vs. Labco Fine Chemicals, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5423/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaito, Ward-3(5) Vs. Labco Fine Chemicals 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion Mahvir Prabhu Chowk Murbad Road Bazar Peth, Kalyan Kalyan(W)-421 301 Thane

Section 144Section 147

…out and there is no material to dislodge such findings. In this process the appellant saved on the safes-tax / VAT and enhanced his profit by manipulating the purchases. On similar facts Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake (2009) 316 ITR 274 and Bhole Nath 355 ITR 290 (Guj) who were manufacturer upheld disallowance of 25%. As the facts of the assessee’s case are similar therefore it would be appropriate if 25% of the amount of unproved purchases of Rs 306779/-. amounting to Rs. 76,695/- is disallowed. This addition will be over and above the profits shown by the appellant in his retu…

ITO WD- 1 (2), Thane vs. Machine & Controls, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5415/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak-Ld. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ssee. 3. Before learned first appellate authority, the assessee pleaded for reasonable estimation. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the factual matrix and inter-alia, relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court rendered in CIT V/s Sanjay Oil Cake 316 ITR 274, CIT V/s Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt Ltd. 355 ITR 290 and CIT V/s Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 restricted the additions to 20% of disputed purchases. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4. After careful consideration, we are of the considered opinion there could be no sale without actual purchase of material keeping in view the assess…

ITO - 33 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jayantkumar Ratilal Mehta, Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5899/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5899/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Respondent: Shri Debang Shah, AR

Section 133(6)Section 148

…considering the facts of the present case and while relying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and also considering the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of SMC in assessee’s own case and to account for the profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize profit earned by assessee against purchase of material in the grey market and undue benefit o…

ITO 24 (3)(5), Mumbai vs. Ravi Ramniklal Kothari, Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5801/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Sharma, DR byFor Respondent: None

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…considering the facts of the present case and while relying upon the following judgments:- 1) ClT vs Bholanath Poly Fab Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290 (Guj). (HC), 2. CIT v Simit D, Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj)-(HC) and 3. CIT vs. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) (1C) and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, and also considering the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of SMC in assessee’s own case and to account for the profit element embedded in these purchase transactions to factorize profit earned by assessee against purchase of material in the grey market and undue benefit o…