Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

Precision Contaneurs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 13(1)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Precision Containuers Ltd. Dcit-13(1)(2) 3Rd Floor, Mittal Tower, B Wing 401, Court Chamber Vs. S.V. Road, Borivali (W) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 092 Mumbai-400 021

…143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act vide order dated 14/03/2016. 4. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of AO by following decisions of various coordinate benches including the Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Vijay proteins Ltd vs ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd), CIT vs. Bolanath Ply Fab P. Ltd. (2013) 355 ITR 290(Guj) and thus justified the addition at the rate of 12.5% on the ground that the AO has only added profit embedded in the said bogus purchases and not added the entire bogus purchases. 5. After hearing both the parties and perused the material available on record, we observed that the ass…

M/S.Cooltech Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-18(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2352 & 2353/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s. Cooltech Enterprises v. Income Tax Officer 311, 3rd Floor, Pioneer Indl. Estate, Ward – 18(1)(3) Room No. 407, 4th Floor, Subhash Road, Jogeshwari (E) Mumbai – 400 060 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, PAN: AAEFC 7983 L Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Dinkle Hariya Department by : Shri Rajesh Ojha Date of Hearing : 23.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These two appeals are filed b…

M/S.Cooltech Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-18(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2352 & 2353/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s. Cooltech Enterprises v. Income Tax Officer 311, 3rd Floor, Pioneer Indl. Estate, Ward – 18(1)(3) Room No. 407, 4th Floor, Subhash Road, Jogeshwari (E) Mumbai – 400 060 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, PAN: AAEFC 7983 L Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Dinkle Hariya Department by : Shri Rajesh Ojha Date of Hearing : 23.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2019 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These two appeals are filed b…

Income Tax Officer-13(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Vijay Vision Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in the manner stated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4813/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) बिाम/ Ito -13(3)(3) M/S. Vijay Vision Room No. 227 Private Ltd, 2Nd Floor Spec House, V. Aayakar Bhawan Ramchandra Lane M K Road Extension, Kachpada, Mumbai-400020 Malad (W), Mumbai- 400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacv2144B (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Miss. Deepika Arora (Dr) Assessee By: Shri. Bharat K Patel सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 4813/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 24.04.2017 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-21/Ito-13(3)(3)/It-107/2016-17, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2010-11, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 17.03.2016 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2010-11. I.T.A. No.4813/Mum/2017

…nts in favour of Revenue a). CIT vs. La Medico, 177 Taxman 628 (2001) (Delhi) b). Sumati Dayal Vs.CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC)(1995) c). CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More 1973 CTR (SC) 500: (1971) 821 ITR 540 (SC). m). Further, in the case of M/s. Vijay Proteins Ltd Vs. ACIT 58 ITD 428 (1996) /55 TTJ 76 (AHD), the Hon'ble I.T.A.T, Mumbai have stated as under: " it is well know that purchases are made from open market without insisting for the genuine bills, the suppliers may be willing to sell those products at a much lower rate as compared to the rate which they may charge in case the dealer has to give a genuine sale invoice i…

Sejal Gems P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

…in Tax Appeal No. 1090 of 2009 and in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 23.10.2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012. The view taken by the Tribunal in case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 58 ITD 428 came to be approved.” (Emphasis supplied) 19.Similarly while dealing with an identical issue, in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (Purchase) ltd. ITA.No.No. 63 of 2012, in the order dated 23/10/2012, the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has held as under: - “We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases them…

Deputy Cosioner of Icome Tax 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Abhishek Millennium Contracts Private Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7197/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

…such estimation. While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon’ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, IT AT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 6.30 In the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), the Hon'ble ITAT was seized with a case of bogus suppliers of oil cakes where 33 parties were found to be bogus by the departmental authorities even though payments were made to the said parties by cross cheques and in fact the A.O, in that case had brought adequate material on record to prove that the…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Skyway Constructon Co., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…t the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also relied on the decision in the case of Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and ITA. No. 5865/M/2017 A.Y.2009-10 further approved the decision of Ahmedabad Bench, ITAT in the case of Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. 6.19 From the above judicial decisions, it is clear that in the case of bogus purchases, it is apt to consider the addition to the extent of profit element on the said bogus purchases instead of adding the total amount of purchases. In the present case appellant executed the works and received payment from ACGM for completing the work contracts.…

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Th Zone Projects, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit-16(3), M/S Th Zone Projects, Room No.446, 705, B Wingh, Cosmic बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Heights, Bhakti Park, Near Vs. M. K. Road, Imax, Wadala, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400035 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aafft1015R

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Solo Hardware P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 5(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The M/s Solo Hardware Pvt. Ltd. Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee…

Sharmistha Mafatia Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar, Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sharmista Mafatlal Mehta, Income Tax Officer-22(2)(3), 404, Rekha Apartment, Mumbai बनाम/ Amrut Nagar, Ghatkopar(W) Vs. Mumbai-400086 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Afapm1923P

…tion of Rs.2,58,637/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 58 ITD 428 and restricted the disallowance to 25% on such alleged bogus purchases. However, in the case of the addition of Rs.2,58,637/- made by the AO as unexplained cash credit u/s 68, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same on the reason that no specific ground has been made by the AO in the assessment order. 5. Before us, the Ld. DR submits that as the assesse…

Shri Narendra G. Pandya, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 22(2)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am

…clusive proof for genuineness of payment. Relying on certain case laws, the Assessing Officer finally concluded that the purchases from the above mentioned hawala dealers are not genuine and as per the ratio of judgement in the case of Vijay Protein Ltd. 1996 58 ITD 428 (Ahmedabad), 25% of such purchases was disallowed. 6. Against the above order assessee appealed before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition of 12.5% of the bogus purchase. 7. Against the above order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. I have heard the ld. Departmental Representative (ld. DR for sh…

Dinesh S. Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(4), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year:2012-13

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Snehalata Ahnand Rane, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(3), Kalyan

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Snehalata Ahnand Rane, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(3), Kalyan

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Snehalata Ahnand Rane, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(3), Kalyan

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Shri Dineshkumar C. Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth Dines…

Ralf Jems P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Shri Jayantilal K. Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-19(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Jayantilal K Jain, Income Tax Officer-19(2)(1), 35, Krishna Kunj, Kika Matru Mandir, बनाम/ Street, Gulalwadi, Tardeo Road, Vs. Mumbai-400004 Mumbai-400007 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Aajpj8095K

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…

Shri Ramesh C.Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…but the profit margin embedded in such amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). 6. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. Whether the purchases themselves were bogus or whether the parties from whom such purchases were allegedly made were bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee did purchase the cloth and s…