How many judgments cite Sumati Dayal v. CIT?

1,967 judgments on BharatTax cite Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sumati Dayal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 115BBE.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT

214 ITR 801Supreme Court of India1995#12 most cited

What is Sumati Dayal v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

1,967

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sumati Dayal v CIT · Section 68 · human probabilities · genuineness of transaction · true nature of transaction · accommodation entry · bogus capital gains · penny stock · look behind apparent form · preponderance of probability · colourable device · unexplained loans

Also reported as

80 Taxmann 89125 CTR 124

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 115BBE Section 69C Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

price rigging colourable device preponderance of probability bogus ltcg penny stock section 10(38)entry operator addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction accommodation entry share application money

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Mumbai District Central Co Op Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 1(1), Mumbai

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA 3198/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 The Mumbai District Cit-1, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. M.K. Road, Mumbai Bank Bhavan Mumbai 400 020 Vs. 207, D.H. Road, Fort Mumbai 400 001 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaaam3185D यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Shri Amar Gahlot याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B. Srinivas, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/03/2018 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 22/03/2018

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…case of the Revenue. It is noteworthy that while coming to a particular conclusion, Hon'ble Calcutta High Court considered following judicial pronouncements:- i. CIT v. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. [1973] 91 ITR 8 (SC) (para 3), ii. Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801/80 Taxman 89 (SC) (para 4), iii. CIT v. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P.) Ltd. [2012] 342 ITR 169/206 Taxman 207/18 taxmann.com 217 (Delhi) (para 4), iv. CIT v. Durga Prasad More [19711] 82 ITR 540 (SC) (para 6), v. CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd. [1994] 208 ITR 465/[1995] 82 Taxman 31 (Cal.) (para 6), vi. ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd. [2012] 3…

Sriram Tie Up Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-9(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1104/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1104/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Sriram Tie Up Pvt. Ltd...................................…………………………........................Appellant 147, Nilgunge Road, Belghoria, Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aamcs 6826 K] Ito, Wd 9(4)..…………………………………………………………..........................................Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 14, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 21, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 3, Kolkata Dated 10.03.2016 & The Solitary Issue Raised Therein Relates To The Addition Of Rs. 9,86,00,000/- Made By The A.O. & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) Under Section 68 By Treating The Share Capital Subscription As Unexplained Cash Credits.

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…A.O. to make the enquiry and in the report submitted to the A.O., the said inspector informed that there was no such company existed at the address given by the assessee. Relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs CIT 214 ITR 801 and in the case of CIT vs Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540, the Assessing Officer held that genuineness of the relevant transactions involving subscription of share capital in the case of the assessee was required to be considered by looking inyo surrounding circumstances as well as by applying the test of human probability. He also held that the onu…

ITO 20(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Anita Pravinkumar Bhansali, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4149/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood(Jm)

Section 133(6)Section 68

…ove the genuineness of loans and credit worthiness of the parties. The AO also took the view that the identity of the parties was also not established. The AO also placed reliance on the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801) and Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540). Accordingly he assessed both the loans aggregating to Rs.5,45,00,000/- as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Before Ld CIT(A), the assessee furnished additional evidences, which consisted of financial statements of the two parties, bank statements, copy of bank accounts, their IT returns and confirm…

Sh. Aashish Arora, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ludhiana

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

ITA 370/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. B.M. MogaFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

Section 37Section 57Section 68

…Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Income-tax authorities are entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality. And also on the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumati Dayal Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801. In these cases Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that to judge any evidence test of human probabilities should be applied. 4.4 The Assessing Officer held that the Assessee could not justify the human probabilities on the following issues: i) The assessee has not given any reason for maintaining huge cash in hand. ii) The assessee has been paying…

Inter Carat Jewellery Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and Stay

ITA 307/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 148Section 69C

…disowned by Shri Hiren Raval. He submitted that the surrounding circumstances show that the purchases made by the assessee were bogus and hence the AO, inter alia, placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801) to reject the entries 6 M/s. Inter Carat Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. made in the books of accounts of the assessee. He submitted that the assessee did not advance its case properly before Ld CIT(A) and hence the Ld CIT(A) was justified in confirming the additions made by the AO. 11. We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the AO h…

Nyka Steels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Panvel, Panvel

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

ITA 3737/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3737/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Nyka Steels Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Cit, Panvel Circle, बनाम/ C-17/6, Midc, Taloja Area, Panvel Vs. Panvel, Dist. Raigad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfn 7647 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ram Tiwari सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 10.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 01.03.2018 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 21.03.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2009- 10. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated U/S 147 By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 M/S. Nyka Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Cit 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Disallowance Of Genuine Purchases Of Rs.1,51,97,687/- As Bogus Purchase From Suspicious Parties. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Levy Of Interest U/S 234B & 234C Of Income Tax Act. 4. On The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Initiation Of Penalty Proceeding U/S 271Fl)(C) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The E-Return Of Income Was Filed On 12.09.2009 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,15,41,380/-. Scrutiny Under Section 143(3) Was Completed On 13.12.2011 Determining Total Income Of Rs 2,23,69,210/-. Subsequently

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271f

…ken as cogent evidence of purchases, in light of the overwhelming evidence the revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 and Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. In the present case the assessee wants that the unassailable fact that the suppliers are non-existent and thus bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be 8 M/s. Nyka Steels Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above apex court dec…

Emami Indrastructure Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 880/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Bajoria, Sr. Counsel, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Avinash Mishra, CIT, ld.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…at there is no conflict between the ratio of McDowell viz-a-viz Azadi Bachao and Mathuram Agarwal. Accordingly the colourable device made with the object of avoidance of tax without any commercial substance not acceptable. In the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT 214 ITR 801, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that test of human probabilities is to be considered circumstances warrants so. In the case of the appellant it is seen that it has acquired on demerger the shares of Zandu Reaiity Pvt. Ltd. @ Rs.2975/- and the average quoted price stock exchange on the date of sale to Emami Rainbow Niketan Pvt. Ltd. was Rs 39…

Sohanraj Uttamchand, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1787/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1787/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vs The Dcit, Shri Sohanraj Uttamchand, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, 24/12. Raghaviah Road, Chennai T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aaapu7932P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Dass, CITFor Respondent: 21.12.2017

Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 250(6)

…e by the Ld.AO. 8.2 Further on examining the decisions relied by the Ld. Revenue Authorities we do not find much strength in the same. They are briefly discussed herein below for reference:- a) The Ld.AO has relied in the case Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in 214 ITR 801. In that case it was with respect to introduction of capital by consistently winning from horse races. Horse race is a game of chance and consistent winning from such game of chance, particularly winning by jackpots etc., is against the theory of human probabilities. However the case of the assessee it is with respect to purchase and sale of shar…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kda Enterprises P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5119/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Anuj Kisnadwalla, ARFor Respondent: B. Shrinivas, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 28

…gift. Thus all the essential requisites of gifts stated by the AO in assessment order have been duly fulfilled by the assessee and no adverse conclusion can be drawn in the case of the assessee. 50. We found that the AO has relied on the decision reported at 214 ITR 801, 82 ITR 540, 207 ITR 89. All these decisions are distinguishable on facts. In the instant case, the gift received by the assessee is in the nature of capital receipt duly supported by documentary evidence and hence cannot be deemed as revenue receipt liable to tax. Thus, all the case laws relied upon by the AO in the assessment order has no relev…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kda Enterprises P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5118/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Anuj Kisnadwalla, ARFor Respondent: B. Shrinivas, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 28

ITO 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vinaylene Textile Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the issue stands remitted to the file of the assessing officer

ITA 3240/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3240/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ito-14(3)(2), M/S. Vinaylene Textile Industries 458, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Gala No. 8, 1St Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Kuntal Modi Estate, L.B.S. Marg, Vs. Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400 086 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1653 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Aarjoo Goradia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri Rahul K. Hakani सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 07.12.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 23.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.70,00,000/- On A/C Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68. The Companies From Which The Assessee Has Accepted Shares Application Money Of Rs.70,00,000/- Were Controlled & 2 Ito Vs. M/S. Vinaylene Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. Operated By Shri Praveen Kumar Jain, Who Admitted In His Statement Recorded During The Course Of Search & Seizure Action That The Concerns/Companies Controlled By Him Were Only Engaged In Providing Accommodation Entries To Various Parties Of Which The Assessee Is Also One Of The Beneficiaries. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Vary, Omit Or Substitute The Aforesaid Ground Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Ms. Aarjoo GoradiaFor Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram &

Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 68

…450 (Bom) has upheld the settlement commission's order where in unjustified huge share premiums where added as bogus accommodation entry. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) has also expounded that revenue should not put upon blinkers and should look into the surrounding circumstances and the theory of preponderance of probability was also upheld. Honourable judicial High Court in the case of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain vs. Pr. CIT [2018] 89 taxmann.com 196 (Bom) has upheld the addition as bogus long-term capital g…

Kamlesh Parwani, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1737/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1737/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Income-Tax Officer 19(3)(2) Kamlesh Parwani बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Flat No.4, Chinar Chs 21St Road, Bandra(W) Lalbaug, Parel Vs. Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaepp-3727-F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : None Revenue By : Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld. Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…f the AO reliance is placed on the following decisions: DCIT vs. Phulwati Devi 314 ITR (AT) 1 (Delhi) The Hon’ble Tribunal has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durgaprasad P. More 82 ITR 540 and Smt. Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 has held that documentary evidence produced by the assessee prima facie supports claim – application of test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances – documentary evidence cannot be accepted – addition justified. In the case of ITO vs. Alok Agarwal 52 SOT 127 (Agra) has held that in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in th…

Kaviraj Construction, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue as well as assessee are hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 1327/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ajgaonkar (AR)For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)

…Officer, therefore, discarded capital losses - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed order of Assessing Officer - Tribunal also confirmed order of Assessing Officer, and while doing so, referred to a decision of Supreme Court in case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 / 80 Taxman 89 to held that evidence produced must be analysed by ITA. No. 1326, 1327/M/2015 A.Y. 2009-10& 2010-11 applying theory of surrounding circumstances and human probabilities - Assessee alleged that without bringing said case to notice of parties, revenue had caused prejudice to its case; all in violation of principles of natural justic…

Map Steels (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Dy. CIT, OSD-1, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 411/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin B. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)

…The Taxing Authorities are entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality of such transactions as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 has further laid down that test of human probabilities has to be applied when considering the surrounding circumstances. Order pronounced in Open Court on 08 - 02- 2018 (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBERACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 08 /02/2018…

Jasamrit Constructions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1091/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginer Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Jasamrit Constructions Income Tax Officer-6(3)(2) Private Ltd. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor Flat No. 901, Building 'B' Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ashok Tower, Near Itc Hotel Mumbai 400020 Parel, Mumbai 400017 Pan – Aabcj8295L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Aarju Goradia

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…cases. One has to consider the totality of facts, surrounding circumstances and human probability for arriving at a conclusion as held in by the Hon. Supreme Court sin the following cases : 1. CIT Vs Durga Prasad 82 ITR 540 (SC) 2. Sumati Dayal Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) The A.O. has done all the above to arrive at a conclusion that it is an unexplained credit u/s. 68. 8.2 This case also falls within the ambit of the term "colourable devices" as coined by Hon. Supreme Court wherein the Hon. Supreme Court has observed in the case of Me Dowell and Co. Ltd. Vs ITO 154 ITR 148 that "Tax planning may be legitimat…

Ramniklal Brothers, Thane vs. ITO WD 3(2), Thane

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 3155/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3155/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ramniklal Brothers Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2), बनाम/ Pehlaj Kunj, Lohar Ali, Ashar It Park, Road No. 16Z, Vs. Thane-400 601 Wagle Industrial Estate-400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaffr 8718 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. N. Hemlatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 27.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 02.01.2017 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Issue Raised Is That Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 12.5% Of Bogus Purchase Amounting To Rs.25,16,287/-.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemlatha

…vidence of purchases. In light of the overwhelming evidence, the Revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). In the present case, the assessee wants that the unassailable fact that the suppliers are non-existent and, thus, bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of Hon’ble Apex Court decisions. 5 Ra…

Aas Mohammed Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1758/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1758/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Aas Mohammed Khan Income Tax Officer 26(1)(1), (Prop. Perfect Steel Corporation) Mumbai बनाम/ Gala No. 503, Gulab Shah Estate, 2Nd Gali, Near Kurla Bus Depot Lbs Vs. Marg, Kurla (W), Mumbai-400 070 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapm 7494 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ramkumar Prajapati ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 27.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 26.12.2016 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2 Aas Mohammed Khan Vs. Ito 2. The Issue Raised Is That Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 12.5 %Percent Of Bogus Purchase Amounting To Rs.12,94,464/-.

For Appellant: Shri Ramkumar PrajapatiFor Respondent: Ms. Hemalatha

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

Dinero Metals Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 15(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 5992/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5992/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dinero Metals Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward – 15(1) (4) C-Shop No. 16, Aaykar Bhawan, बनाम/ 551 Shangrilla, P. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacd 2923 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. C. Jain ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

For Appellant: Shri R. C. JainFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha

…dence of purchases. In light of the overwhelming evidence the revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by honourable apex court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). In the present case, the assessee wants that the 5 Dinero Metals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO unassailable fact that the suppliers are non existent and thus bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of abo…

Alpa P. Parekh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 27(1), Navi Mumbai

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

ITA 5894/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5894/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Alpa P. Parekh I.T.O. Ward – 27(1)(1) A/401, Krishna Bldg., It Office, Vashi Railway Station बनाम/ Vasant Sagar Complex, Building, Navi Mumbai Thakur Village, Kandivali (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpp 8359 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariyaFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…vidence of purchases. In light of the overwhelming evidence, the Revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). In the present case, the assessee wants that the 7 Alpa P. Parekh vs. ITO unassailable fact that the suppliers are non-existent and, thus, bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of Hon’ble Ap…

Parth Tradelinks Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-13(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 5482/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.5482 & 5483/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/S. Parth Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer – 13(1)(3) बनाम/ B-1602, Kailash Tower, M. G. Road, Aaykar Bhawan, M. K. Road, Vs. Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacf 6609 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. N. Hemlatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 28.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 05.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: These Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Respective Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) For Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemlatha

Section 131Section 133(6)

…of the overwhelming evidence, the Revenue authorities cannot put upon blinkers and accept these purchases M/s. Parth Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. as genuine. This proposition is duly supported by Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). In the present case, the assessee wants that the unassailable fact that the suppliers are non-existent and, thus, bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of Hon’ble Apex Court decisions. 10.…