Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

58 ITD 428Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1996#165 most cited

What is Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT authority for?

Where purchases are found to be non-genuine or fictitious, a reasonable disallowance of 25% of such purchases or the peak credit, whichever is higher, can be made. This is applied to address unexplained expenditure under Section 69C when actual goods are likely procured from the grey market.

430

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vijay Proteins Ltd v ACIT · 58 ITD 428 · bogus purchases · unexplained expenditure · Section 69C · 25% disallowance · peak credit · grey market transactions · fictitious purchases · Section 147

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 69CSection 145(3)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 142(1)Section 133ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 145(3)section 69caccommodation entrysection 69businesssection 13documentcompanysection 148total incomesection 147section 143(3)

Judgments citing Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

Ariha Diamond Jewellery P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3865/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Sejal Export (India), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3864/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Sejal Export (India), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3858/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Sejal Export (India), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3857/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Sejal Export (India), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3856/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Sejal Export (India), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3855/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Sejal Export (India), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3854/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…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 thems…

Vaibhav Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. Ast CIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4328/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay R. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 69C

…profit element on the disputed purchases could be brought to tax. Therefore, relying on the decision in Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), Kachwala Gems v. JCIT 288 ITR 10 (SC), CIT v. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428, the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to 30% of the disputed purchases. Thusit comes to Rs. 90,58,645/ (30% 0f Rs. 3,01,95,484/-) for AY 2008-09, Rs.4,70,82,615/- (30% of Rs.15,69,42,051/-) for AY 2009-10, Rs.8,90,49,891/- (30% of Rs.29,68,32,972/-) for AY 2010-11 and Rs.9,14,85,702/- (30% of Rs.30,49,52,341/-) for AY 2011-1…

Vaibhav Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4323/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay R. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 69C

…profit element on the disputed purchases could be brought to tax. Therefore, relying on the decision in Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), Kachwala Gems v. JCIT 288 ITR 10 (SC), CIT v. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428, the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to 30% of the disputed purchases. Thusit comes to Rs. 90,58,645/ (30% 0f Rs. 3,01,95,484/-) for AY 2008-09, Rs.4,70,82,615/- (30% of Rs.15,69,42,051/-) for AY 2009-10, Rs.8,90,49,891/- (30% of Rs.29,68,32,972/-) for AY 2010-11 and Rs.9,14,85,702/- (30% of Rs.30,49,52,341/-) for AY 2011-1…

DCIT Cen Cir 2(3), Mumbai vs. Vaibhav D Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4408/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay R. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 69C

…profit element on the disputed purchases could be brought to tax. Therefore, relying on the decision in Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), Kachwala Gems v. JCIT 288 ITR 10 (SC), CIT v. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428, the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to 30% of the disputed purchases. Thusit comes to Rs. 90,58,645/ (30% 0f Rs. 3,01,95,484/-) for AY 2008-09, Rs.4,70,82,615/- (30% of Rs.15,69,42,051/-) for AY 2009-10, Rs.8,90,49,891/- (30% of Rs.29,68,32,972/-) for AY 2010-11 and Rs.9,14,85,702/- (30% of Rs.30,49,52,341/-) for AY 2011-1…

DCIT Cen Cir 2(3), Mumbai vs. Vaibhav D Shah, Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4407/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 1Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vaibhav Deepak Shah Assistant Commissioner Of 5/7, V.P. Road, Income Tax, Central Circle-13 Vs. Dadarkar House, 1St New Cgo Building, Prathistha Floor, Flat No. 9-10, Bhavan. M.K. Road Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Bbgps2674L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay R. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 69C

…profit element on the disputed purchases could be brought to tax. Therefore, relying on the decision in Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd. 355 ITR 290 (Guj), Kachwala Gems v. JCIT 288 ITR 10 (SC), CIT v. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428, the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to 30% of the disputed purchases. Thusit comes to Rs. 90,58,645/ (30% 0f Rs. 3,01,95,484/-) for AY 2008-09, Rs.4,70,82,615/- (30% of Rs.15,69,42,051/-) for AY 2009-10, Rs.8,90,49,891/- (30% of Rs.29,68,32,972/-) for AY 2010-11 and Rs.9,14,85,702/- (30% of Rs.30,49,52,341/-) for AY 2011-1…

ITO WD 2(5), Kalyan vs. Hasmukharai & Co., Ambernath

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 193/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 51

…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 and sell the finished goods. In that view of the matter,…

ITO WD 2(5), Kalyan vs. Hasmukharai & Co., Ambernath

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 192/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 51

…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 and sell the finished goods. In that view of the matter,…

Kiran Navin Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(2)(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2603/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…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…

Kiran Navin Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO -23(2)(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2602/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…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…

Shyamdhar S. Mishra, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4314/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 133(6)Section 147

…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…

Shyamdhar S. Mishra, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4313/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 133(6)Section 147

…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…

ITO 19(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Babulal U Munot, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4506/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4506/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) The Ito-19(1)(2), Mumbai, बिधम/ Shri Babulal U Munot 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Prop. M/S. Steel Samrat Vs. (India) Flat No. 1901-A, 19Th Tardeo Road, Mumbai- 400007 Floor, Shreepati Tower, A Wing, Tatya Gharpure Path, Girgaon Mumbai-04 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aftpm5429H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri T. A. Khan (Dr) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.03.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11.05.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 15.05.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -30, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “(1) Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Restricting The Addition To The Extent Of 7.5% Of Non-Genuine Purchase Claimed By The Assessee A.Y.2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T. A. Khan (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69C

…ter of controversy has been adjudicated by the CIT(A) on the basis of the decision of CIT Vs. Simit Sheth (2013) 38 taxmann.com 385 (Guj), Bholanath Polyfab P. Ltd. (supra), M/s. Sanket Steel Traders (ITA. No. 2801/Ahd/2008 dated 20.05.2011 and Vijay Proteins 58 ITD 428. The addition was restricted to the extent of gross profit of the assessee which doesn’t seems unjustifiable. Therefore, in the said circumstances, we affirmed the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and decide this issue in favour of the assessee against the revenue. ISSUE NO. 2:- 7. Issue no.2 is in connection with the deletion of the addition…

Sachin Laxman Jangid, Thane vs. ITO WD 3(3), Thane

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1071/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Sachin Laxman Jangid, Income Tax Officer, Porp. Sachin Construction, Ward-3(3), बनाम/ 1, Mandelia House, Wagle Ind. Estate, Vs. Ramesh Pradhan Road, Thane (W)-400604 Naupada, Thane-400602 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Adbpj0867C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri M.Subramanian Shri M.V. Rajguru-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 10/05/2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing: 10/05/2018 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

Section 147

…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 7 Shri Sachin Laxman Jangid essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee…

M/S. Shandar Interiors Pvt. Ld., Pune vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax : 3, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 909/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, JCIT
Section 143Section 263

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे पुणे म"म"म"म" पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE सु"ी सु"ी सुषमा सु"ी सु"ी सुषमा सुषमा चावला सुषमा चावला चावला, "याियक चावला "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं "ी एवं "ी "ी डी "ी डी डी. क"णाकरा डी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा राव राव, लेखा राव लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.908 to 910/…