Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Shree Chemtech Marketing P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(3)(3), Mumbai

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

…taken 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 9 Shree Chemtech Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO present case, the assessee wants that the unassailable fact that the suppliers are nonexistent and thus bogus should be ignored and only the documents being produced should be considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above apex court dec…

ACIT Cir 7(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gauges Bourdon India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objections by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 7206 To 7208/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) Acit, Circle 7(1)-1, M/S. Gauges Bourdon India Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 130, 1St Floor, 194-195, Gopi Tank Road, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mahim, Mumbai-400 016 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 1986 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : ""या"ेपक सं /C.O. Nos. 188 To 190/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos. 7206 To 7208/Mum/2016) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12) M/S. Gauges Bourdon India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle 7(1)-1, Room No. 130, 1St Floor, 194-195, Gopi Tank Road, बनाम/ Mahim, Mumbai-400 016 Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 1986 A (Cross Objector) : (Assessee) Revenue By : Shri V. Justin : Dr. Vinay D. Mulye Assessee By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.08.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 16.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “ई” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 7206 to 7208/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2011-12) ACIT, Circle 7(1)-1, M/s. Gauges Bourdon India Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 130, 1st Floor, 194-195, Gopi Tank Road, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mahim, Mumbai-400 016 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAACG 1986 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : ""या"ेपक सं /C.O. Nos. 188 to 190/Mum/2017 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 7206 to 7208/Mum/2016…

Sumit M. Malhotra, Kalyan vs. ITO 3(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6697 & 6698/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Mr. Sumit M. Malhotra Income-Tax Officer 3(4), Rani Mansion, 2Nd Floor, C/O. M/S. S. M. Steel Traders बनाम/ 702, “A” Wing, Archies Apartment, Murbad Road, Vs. Oak Baug, Near Railway Station, Kalyan (W) – 421 301 Kalyan (W) – 421 301 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaypm 8541 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Justin

…aken 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 considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above apex court decisions. 14. We further find that Hon'ble…

Deepak Engineers, Mumbai vs. ITO 31(1)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 636/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Deepak Engineers Ito-31(1)(4), बनाम/ A/20, Saraf Kaskar Indl. Estate, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Oshiwara, Jogeshwari (W), Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 102 Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafd 2730 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha

…taken 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. 8. 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 above apex court decisions. 9. I find that in this case the…

Bhaveshwar Traders, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2730/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Bhaveshwar Traders Astt. Cit-31(1), बनाम/ Gala No. 15, Guffa Road, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Opp. Jain Mandir, Jogeshwari (E), Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 060 Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaifb 5683 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Mistry ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 29.08.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 12.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 28.12.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10. 2. The Issue Raised Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 100% Of Bogus Purchase, Amounting To Rs.22,39,511/-. The Assessee Has Also Raised Ground Challenging The Reopening Of This Case.

…taken 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. 10. 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 above apex court decisions. However, I find that in this cas…

Bright Steel Centre, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am M/S. Bright Steel Centre Vs. Ito 19(1)(2) 72, Cp Tank Road Mumbai 1St Floor, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No.Aadf89916F Appellant) .. Respondent)

…urden of proof, onus of proving is always on the person who makes the claim and not on the Revenue. While dealing with the issue of deciding the burden of Droof, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT Vs. Durgaprasad More 82 ITR 540 and Sumati Dayal Vs. GT 214 ITR 801 has held that the apparent must be considered real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that Taxing Authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find out the reality and the matter has to be considered by applying the test of human probabilities. The Hon'ble court also held th…

Bhavik Kamlesh Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 15(2)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Shaktijit Dey, Jm

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘D’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya, AM & Shri Shaktijit Dey, JM ITA No.1768/Mum/2017 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Shri Bhavik Kamlesh Shah The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ B-402 Plot No.140, Road No.9 Ward 15(2)(3) Navkar CHS, Jawahar Nagar Mumbai. Vs. Goregaon (West) Mumbai – 400 062. PAN : AWPPS4116G. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri N.M.Porwal Respondent by : Shri Purshottam Kumar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 24.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 03.10.2017 आदेश / O R D E R…

ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Jostars Orogotech P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed and cross objection by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Shaktijit Dey, Jm

…l test with regard to genuineness of the transaction is 'Preponderance of Probabilities' and not 'Beyond reasonable doubt'. Reliance is placed on C. Vasantlal & Co. Vs. C1T(1962) 45 ITR 206 (SC), Chaturbhuj Panauj AIR 1969 (SC) and Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). One has to consider the totality of facts, surrounding circumstances and human probability for arriving at a conclusion as held in CIT Vs. Durga Prasad 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Daya Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC). 6) The purchases from Hawala operator falls within the ambit of the term colourable devices' and the Hon'ble Supreme Court obse…

Manish D. Mandhania, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 33(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Shaktijit Dey, Jm

…taken 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 considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above Apex Court decisions. 14. We further find that Hon’ble jur…

Nitin Avantilal Doshi, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)32, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 730/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Nitin Avantilal Doshi Cit(A)-32, बनाम/ Gala No.3 To 5, Plot No. 13-A, Mumbai Magazine Street, Darukhana, Reay Vs. Road Rly Station, Mumbai-400 010 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpd 1214 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ram Tiwari सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 07.09.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 03.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Learned Cit(A)-32, Mumbai Dated 06.01.2015 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Issue Raised Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining Disallowance Of 12.5% Of Bogus Purchase Amounting To Rs.23,13,873/-.

…aken 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 considered. This proposition is totally unsustainable in light of above apex court decisions. 7 Nitin Avantilal Doshi vs. CIT(A…

Asst CIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Pratiksha Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…of the Assessment Order). No inquiry was however made in the case of sales broker M/s. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholdings Pvt. Ltd. VII. With regards to the alleged commission at 5 percent, the Assessing Officer relied on the decision of Sumati Dayal reported at 214 ITR 801 to state that it is apparent that when the assessee has obtained artificial ITA Nos. 1422 & 1423/Mum/2010, Smt. Pratiksha Shah capital gain he would have to pay some sort of compensation to the operators since the operators have carried out this illegal activity at a large scale. Further, reliance was placed on the order of the CIT(A) in the cas…

ACIT 16(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Champalal S. Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 1295/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) बिाम/ Shri Champalal S. Shah, Income Tax Officer – 16(2)(3), A-8, Maulana Shaukat Ali Pratyakshakar Bhavan, V. Road, Matru Mandir, Grant Road (East), Mumbai 400 007. Mumbai – 400007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aahps4629Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 2415/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) बिाम/ Income Tax Officer – 16(2)(3), Shri Champalal S. Shah, B-33, Pannalal Terrace, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, V. 2N D Floor, Grant Road (E), 2N D Floor, Matru Mandir, Mumbai 400 007. Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400 007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aahps4629Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By Shri Rushabh Mehta Revenue By : Shri P.R. Ghosh, Cit D.R.

…assessee could not produce any evidences of purchase and sale transactions? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in not taking cognizance of Hon. Supreme Court in ITA No. 1295/Mum/2014 & 3 case of Sumati Dayal v/s CIT;214 ITR 801 (1995) wherein the Hon'ble Court has agreed that the question of source of money had to be considered in the light of human probabilities, as in the case under consideration, the assessee used colorable device to prove purchase and sale transactions as genuine ones by submitting the facts that the purchasers used to deposit money in the form of c…

Champalal S. Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 1295/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) बिाम/ Shri Champalal S. Shah, Income Tax Officer – 16(2)(3), A-8, Maulana Shaukat Ali Pratyakshakar Bhavan, V. Road, Matru Mandir, Grant Road (East), Mumbai 400 007. Mumbai – 400007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aahps4629Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 2415/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) बिाम/ Income Tax Officer – 16(2)(3), Shri Champalal S. Shah, B-33, Pannalal Terrace, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, V. 2N D Floor, Grant Road (E), 2N D Floor, Matru Mandir, Mumbai 400 007. Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400 007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aahps4629Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By Shri Rushabh Mehta Revenue By : Shri P.R. Ghosh, Cit D.R.

…assessee could not produce any evidences of purchase and sale transactions? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in not taking cognizance of Hon. Supreme Court in ITA No. 1295/Mum/2014 & 3 case of Sumati Dayal v/s CIT;214 ITR 801 (1995) wherein the Hon'ble Court has agreed that the question of source of money had to be considered in the light of human probabilities, as in the case under consideration, the assessee used colorable device to prove purchase and sale transactions as genuine ones by submitting the facts that the purchasers used to deposit money in the form of c…

ACIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Pratiksha B Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…of the Assessment Order). No inquiry was however made in the case of sales broker M/s. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholdings Pvt. Ltd. VII. With regards to the alleged commission at 5 percent, the Assessing Officer relied on the decision of Sumati Dayal reported at 214 ITR 801 to state that it is apparent that when the assessee has obtained artificial ITA Nos. 1422 & 1423/Mum/2010, Smt. Pratiksha Shah capital gain he would have to pay some sort of compensation to the operators since the operators have carried out this illegal activity at a large scale. Further, reliance was placed on the order of the CIT(A) in the cas…