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

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

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

…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

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

…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

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

…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.…

ITO 19.3.1, MUMBAI vs. SALEM STEEL INDUSTRIES, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

…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, MUMBAI vs. M/S. KOBE STEEL INDIA, MUMBAI

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

…he Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whole amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income\nPage 4\nITA No. 5623/Mum/2024\nΑ.Υ. 2011-12\nM/s Kobe Steel India\nof 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 ?”\n8. 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)2…

PRADEEP D CHARYA ITO 19.2.4, MUMBAI vs. PARASMAL FOZHARAJ SANGHVI HUF, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

…|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

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

…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…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. MAHENDRA HEMRAJ JAIN, MUMBAI

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

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

…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…

ITO-19(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. THANA RAM MANGI LAL CHOUDHARY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

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)

…. 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…

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

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.

…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

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: -

…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…

DCIT 12 (2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GROWEL PROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

…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…