Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad and Ganesh Rice Mills vs. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 145(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 69C, Section 68, Section 37.

Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad and Ganesh Rice Mills vs. CIT

Q: How many judgments cite Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad and Ganesh Rice Mills vs. CIT?

93 judgments on BharatTax cite Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad and Ganesh Rice Mills vs. CIT (294 ITR 316), spanning 2016 to 2025.

294 ITR 316High Court2007#1209 most cited

What is Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad and Ganesh Rice Mills vs. CIT authority for?

Where purchases are found to be bogus and the cash is siphoned off, additions made by the Assessing Officer are sustained. This applies when the assessee cannot produce suppliers who are found to be providing bogus bills without actual dealing of goods.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,406 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad · Ganesh Rice Mills v. CIT · 294 ITR 316 · bogus purchases · siphoned off cash · section 69C · section 145(3) · accommodation entry · genuineness of transaction · production of suppliers

Sections most often in play

Section 145(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 69C Section 68 Section 37 Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 145(3)section 145 accommodation entry section 69c section 133(6)genuineness of the transaction reassessment proceedings section 68 section 148 section 142(1)section 13 appeal before the tribunal

Judgments citing Shwetambar Steels v. ITO Ahmedabad and Ganesh Rice Mills vs. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. S S Pulses Manufacturing Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2384/DEL/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…sallowances of bogus purchases, have been upheld. Some of these are mentioned below: 5.3 100% disallowance of bogus / unverifiable purchases was upheld, in following cases:- 1. CIT Vs. La Medica (2001) 250 ITR 575 (Del) 2. Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (1) Khandelwal Trading Co. Vs. ACIT (1996) 55 TTJ (JP) 261 Swetambar Steels Ltd. Vs. ITO 707 / 1075 / 1262 / 1263 / JD (2002) ITAT (Ahd). In the case of Swetambar Steels Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble ITAT, Ahmedabad had confirmed the is allowance of the bogus purchase in entirety stating that the purchases shown from the respective parties were found…

ACIT-19(1), Mumbai vs. Parul Diamond, Mumbai

In the result, appeal and cross-objection filed by the revenue as well as the assessee respectively, stands dismissed

ITA 6992/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 37Section 68

…vocation of provisions of section 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whale amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income of the assessee and without considering the decision in Sri. Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus purchases from parties which are found to be non- genuine was disallowed and the same was also upheld ?” 10. " Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the addition to 6% as against the 100% addition of Rs. 6,66,602/- made by the AO , by ignoring…

Mayank Jayantilal Desai, Mumbai vs. ITO- Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 706/MUM/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 145(3)Section 147

…ayantilal Desai provisions of section 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whole amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income of the assessee and not appreciated the decision in Sri. Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus purchases, from hawala parties, was disallowed and same decision was also upheld?" 11.The appeal u/a. 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is being filed in view of Tax Effect involved in the instant case is Rs. 94,90,418/-, which is above the prescribed limit mentioned in the CBDT's Circular F.No.279/Misc.…

Surendra Kumar, Income Tax Officer, Ward -19(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mayank Jayantilal Desai, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1300/MUM/2025[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2007-2008

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 145(3)Section 147

ITO 19.3.1, Mumbai vs. Salem Steel Industries, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1299/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, CIT-DRFor Respondent: None

Section 250Section 37Section 68Section 69CSection 74

…that after invocation of provisions of 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whole amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income of the assessee and not considered the decision in Shri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus purchases, from hawala parties, was disallowed and same decision was also upheld ?" 11. The appeal u/s. 253 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 before the Hon'ble ITAT, is being filed, in view of Tax Effect involved in the instant case is Rs. 83,400/-, which is above the prescribed limit prescribed in the CBDT's…

ITO-19(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kobe Steel India, Mumbai

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

ITA 5623/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whole amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income Page 4 ITA No. 5623/Mum/2024 Α.Υ. 2011-12 M/s Kobe Steel India of the assessee One such case is Srl. Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus purchases, from the hawala parties, was disallowed and same was also upheld ?” 8. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is perverse in not considering that the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of N. K. PROTEINS LTD Vs. Dy. CIT (2016)29…

Pradeep D Charya ITO 19.2.4, Mumbai vs. Parasmal Fozharaj Sanghvi HUF, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5832/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No.5832/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito 19(2)(4), Mumbai V/S. Parasmal Fozharaj 507, Piramal Chambers, बिाम Sanghvi Huf Lalbaug, Mumbai 400012 10/2 Atul Niwas, Khetwadi Road Corner, Mumbai 400004 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaahp5379M Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya & Shri Hansraj Sanghvi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. Dr स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 18.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya & ShriFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, SR

Section 250

…|आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई| IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सुं./ITA No.5832/MUM/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12) ITO 19(2)(4), Mumbai v/s. Parasmal Fozharaj 507, Piramal Chambers, बिाम Sanghvi HUF Lalbaug, Mumbai 400012 10/2 Atul Niwas, Khetwadi Road Corner, Mumbai 400004 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAAHP5379M Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee by: Shri Vimal Punmiya & Shri Hansraj Sanghvi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Mr. Vir…

Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chambers Mumbai vs. Bharat Hiralal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for eal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 729/MUM/2025[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Bharat Hiralal Shah, 501 5Th Floor, Income Tax Office 220, 4Th Floor Badrikashram 1St Piramal Chambers Lalbaug, Vs. Khetwadi Lane, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400004. Pan No. Aaeps 5511 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Khushali PandyaFor Respondent: Mr. Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR

…purchases found as bogus to the total income of the amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income of the assessee and without assessee and without considering the decision in Sri. Ganesh Rice considering the decision in Sri. Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus purchases, from five parties, was disallowed and same was also purchases, from five parties, was disallowed and same was also purchases, from five parties, was disallowed…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shanta Techno Private Limited, Raipur

ITA 155/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 155/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…sallowances of bogus purchases, have been upheld. Some of these are mentioned below: 5.3 100% disallowance of bogus / unverifiable purchases was upheld, in following cases: 1. CIT Vs. La Medica (2001) 250 ITR 575 (Del) 2. Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All) 3. Khandelwal Trading Co. Vs. ACIT (1996) 55 TTJ (JP) 261 Swetambar Steels Ltd. Vs. ITO 707 / 1075 / 1262 / 1263 / JD (2002) ITAT (Ahd). In the case of Swetambar Steels Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad had confirmed the is allowance of the bogus purchase in entirety stating that the purchases shown from the respective parties wer…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Mahendra Hemraj Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 5313/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer, 19(3)(1) Mahendra Hemraj Jain 405, 4Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, 10 Hindustan Building, 6Th Lalbaug Vs. Kumbharwada Lane, M.S.Ali Mumbai-400012 Road,Mumbai-400004 Pan No. Aaipj 7749 P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shyam AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)

…idering that after invocation of provisions of section 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whole amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income of the assessee. One such case is Shri. Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All), wherein the entire amount of bogus purchases, from five parties, was disallowed and same was also upheld ?" 9. In this case, the tax effect involved is Rs. 28,69,060/-, which is below the prescribed limit as per CBDT's revised circular No. 05 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, however, this case falls under the exception within the ambit of excepti…

Mahalakshmi Laboratories Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 615/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…d not prove that goods were actually supplied by the two parties i.e., Shri Jawahar Lal Shah and Shri Daya Nand Maruti Phalke. Furthermore, ld.DR relied upon the decision in the case of Shri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT of Allahabad High Court reported in (2007) 294 ITR 316, wherein the assessee failed to establish the purchases in question which have been made from the non- 7 Mahalakshmi Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. existent firms. In the said case, Tribunal has upheld the finding of Assessing Officer that in order to lower profits, bogus purchases had been introduced and held that addition on account of disallowance o…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1), Hyderabad vs. Mahalakshmi Laboratories Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 606/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

ITO-19(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Thana Ram Mangi Lal Choudhary, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2698/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-19(3)(1), Mumbai Thana Ram Mangi Lal Choudhary Vs 33/36, Prabhu Shree Ram Mandir, 4Th Kumbharwada, Maharashtra-400004. Pan: Afepc 1898 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule Addl. CIT/ Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…. Some of these are mentioned below: 6.3 100% disallowance of bogus / unverifiable purchases was upheld, in following cases:- 5 Thana Ram Mangi Lal Choudhary A.Y. 2009-10 1. CIT Vs. La Medica (2001) 250 ITR 575 (Del) 2. Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (All) 3. Khandelwal Trading Co. Vs. ACIT (1996) 55 TTJ (JP) 261 Swetambar Steels Ltd. Vs. ITO 707 / 1075 / 1262 / 1263 / JD (2002) ITAT (Ahd). In the case of Swetambar Steels Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble ITAT, Ahmedabad had confirmed the is allowance of the bogus purchase in entirety stating that the purchases shown from the respective parties wer…

Dinesh Haldia, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 384/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 153ASection 260ASection 69C

…s not need any interference on my part, hence, I uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and dismiss the issue in dispute raised by the Revenue." 11. in view of the findings recorded above, questions (c) and (d) would not arise." In [2007] 294 ITR 316 (Allahabad) Sri Ganesh Rice Mills v. Commissioner of Income-tax entire bogus purchases were disallowed and upheld. In this case the assessee is a manufacturer and he claimed to have purchased the same item from open market as well. The assessee did not purchase the item from parties other than the parties found to have provided bogus bills to ass…

DCIT 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S B. Chopda Construction P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is Partly Allowed

ITA 1513/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1513/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-9(2)(1) बिधम/ M/S. B. Chopda Construction Room No.665A, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, A-208, Sagar Tech Plaza, Churchgate, Mumbai- Sakinaka Junction, Andheri, 400020. Mumbai-400072. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb4214G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohan Tandon Revenue By: Shri Himanshu Sharma (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 27.12.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -16, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “11. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Restricting The Suppressed Profit To The Extent Of 12.50% Of Bogus Purchases, When The Assessee Could Not Produce Any Parties Or Evidence That The Said Goods Were Purchased A.Y.2012-13 & The Onus Of Proving Genuineness Of Purchases Was Not Discharged By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Mohan TandonFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma (Sr. AR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147

…finding of the authorities below, no question of law arises for this Court to interfere. 13 A.Y.2012-13 6.2.15 Hon’ble Allahabad High Court while dealing with the issue of bogus purchase in the case of Sri Ganesh Rice Mills. Commissioner of Income-tax [2007] 294 ITR 316 (ALL.), held as under : "Where Assessing Officer had recorded a finding that in order to lower profits, bogus purchases has been introduced and Tribunal upheld such finding, addition on account of disallowance of such purchases was justified [Assessment year 1984. 85] The assessee was engaged in the production of gram, pulses, rice chunni-bhusi…

ITO 8 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. Bhairav Steel Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 4126/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4126/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito 8(2)(1) बिधम/ Bhairav Steel Enterprises Room No.259/A,2Nd Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 10, Kanti Nagar, A/30, Road, Mumbai-400020. Rajgruhi, Behind J. B. Nagar, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400059. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb9118K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Joshi (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/03/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 25.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -16, 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 Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Joshi (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 148

…re concurrent finding of the authorities below, no question of arises for this Court to interfere." 6.2.11. Hon’ble Allahabad High Court while; dealing with the issue of bogus purchase in the case of Sri Ganesh Rice Mills v. Commissioner of Income-tax 120071 294 ITR 316 (ALL.) , held as under: "Where Assessing Officer had recorded a finding that in order to lower profits, bogus purchases had been introduced and Tribunal 11 A.Y.2009-10 it such finding, addition on account of disallowance of such purchases was justified (Assessment year -1984-85) The assessee was engaged in the production of grain, pulses, rice…

Kabra Brothers, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2022/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 145(3)Section 147

…ffect of bogus purchases, we find it justified to add back that amount (Bogus Purchase along with proportionate freight Charges incurred) to the income. Hon’ble Allahabad High Court has given similar verdict in the case of "Sri Ganesh Rice Mills v. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316(All) (HC). 25. Regarding Bogus Purchase, as per the discussion made above the following addition related to relevant parties ,as mentioned below, to the tune of Rs. 19,40,92,355/- is hereby added to the income of the assessee. Sl. No. Name of the parties Fake Purchase (Rs.) 1 M/s. Apex Energy Resources Private Ltd. Om 1,57,20,020/- Tower, R No. 3…

DCIT 12 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. Growel Projects Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6446/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rehmandcit 12(2)(2) M/S Growel Projects Limited Room No. 262/245, 1St Floor, Cts No. 151, Growel House, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Vs. Akurli Road, Kandivali East, Mumbai-400029. Mumbai. Pan: Aaccg2638M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. Vinod Kumar (Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Bhandari (CA)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR REHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT 12(2)(2) M/s Growel Projects Limited Room No. 262/245, 1st Floor, CTS No. 151, Growel House, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Vs. Akurli Road, Kandivali East, Mumbai-400029. Mumbai. PAN: AACCG2638M Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri V. Vinod Kumar (Sr. DR) Respondent by : Shri P.P. Bhandari (CA) Date of Hearing : 13.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 13.01.2020 ORDERUNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by revenue…

ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi vs. Agson Global Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 5269/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal, CIT DR

Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…e of NK industries Ltd vs. DCIT (2016) 72 taxmann.com 289 (Gujarat), decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in CIT vs. La Medica (2001) 117 Taxman 628 (Del), decision of the honourable Allahabad High Court in case of Shri Ganesh Rice mills vs. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316, decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in case of Vijay proteins Ltd vs. ACIT (2015) 58 taxmann.com 44 (Gujarat), Sanjay oilcake industries vs. CIT (2009) 316 Agson Global Pvt. Ltd Vs. ACIT, ITA No. 3741to 3746/Del/2019 (assessee) ITA No. 5264 to 5269/Del/2019 (Revenue) (Assessment Year: 2012-13 to 2017-18) ITR 274 (Gujarat). The learne…

Agson Global Pvt. Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

ITA 3743/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal, CIT DR

Section 139Section 143Section 153A