Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

ITO WD 1(3), Kalyan vs. Pushpak Auxichem P.Ltd, Thane

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, M/S Pushpak Auxichem Pvt. Ward-1(3), Ltd. बनाम/ 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, 804, Iris, 8Th Floor, Vs. Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Regency Estate, Bldg. No.7, Kalyan (West), Dayaneshwar Ngar, Kalyan, Maharashtra-421301 Shill Road, Dombivali (East), Thane (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aabcp0099E

…uch amount would be subjected to tax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders 6 M/s. Pushpak Auxichem Pvt. Ltd. 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…

Sunil Great (Hyk) Processors P.Ltd, Bhiwandi vs. Asst CIT Cir 1, Kalyan

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunil Great (Hyk) Processors Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1 बनाम/ House No. 1, Green Park, 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Vs. A-Wing, 1St Floor, Wayale Nagar Khandakpada, Bhiwandi-421302 Kalyan (W), Maharashtra-421301 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aajcs1619M

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, एच,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunil Great (HYK) Processors ACIT, Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1 बनाम/ House No. 1, Green Park, 1st Floor, Mohan Plaza, Vs. A-Wing, 1st Floor, Wayale Nagar Khandakpada, Bhiwandi-421302 Kalyan (W), Maharashtra-421301 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AAJCS1619M "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by NONE राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri…

Mayur Shrimankar, Mumbai vs. ITO-21(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…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 WD 3(5), Kalyan vs. Reliable Enterprises, Dombivali

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

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

…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. This being the position, the only question that survives is what should be the fair profit rate out of the bogus purchases which should be added back to the income of the assessee. The Commissioner adopted ratio of 30% of such total sales. The Tribunal, however, scaled down to 12.5%. We may notice that in the immediately prece…

DCIT 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Parth Chem Imepx P.Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly 9.The appeal of the Revenue in ITA no. 2952/Mum/2017 for AY 2009-10 is allowed for the statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2952/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

…on entries which led to total addition to the tune of Rs.24,21,116/-, vide assessment order dated 28-03-2014 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. The AO relied upon decision of ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Vijay Proteins Limited v ACIT reported in (1996) 55 TTJ 76(Ahd.-trib.) : 56 ITD 428, while upholding additions to the tune of 25% of bogus purchases. The A.O also disallowed business losses of Rs.38,55,200/- which was claimed by the assessee on account of difference between the bogus purchase and bogus sales. The AO referred to reply to the Q.No. 28 with respect to the statement given by the said director…

DCIT 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Parth Chem Imepx P.Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly 9.The appeal of the Revenue in ITA no. 2952/Mum/2017 for AY 2009-10 is allowed for the statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2952/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

…on entries which led to total addition to the tune of Rs.24,21,116/-, vide assessment order dated 28-03-2014 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. The AO relied upon decision of ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Vijay Proteins Limited v ACIT reported in (1996) 55 TTJ 76(Ahd.-trib.) : 56 ITD 428, while upholding additions to the tune of 25% of bogus purchases. The A.O also disallowed business losses of Rs.38,55,200/- which was claimed by the assessee on account of difference between the bogus purchase and bogus sales. The AO referred to reply to the Q.No. 28 with respect to the statement given by the said director…

Mitesh Chimanlal Savla, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 21(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

…by following the due procedure. On merits, the Ld.CIT(A), for the detailed reasons mentioned in his order, has held that profit element involved in such bogus purchases can only be added and, therefore, relying upon the judgement of Vijay Proteins Ltd vs CIT 58 ITD 428, confirmed disallowance of 25% on such alleged bogus purchases thereby an addition of Rs.18,58,158 was retained and the remaining addition of Rs.55,74,474 was deleted. Still aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard the parties and perused material available on record. With regard to ground No.1 pertaining the validity o…

DCIT 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Standard Greases & Sepcialites P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 475/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-14(3)(2), 455, M/S. Standard Greases & Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Specialities Pvt. Ltd. M.K. Marg, Mumbai- 400 020 बिधम/ 101, Ketan Apartment, 233, R.B. Mehta Marg, Patel Vs. Chowk, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai-400 077 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs2136B (अपीलाथी/Revenue) (प्रत्यथी / Assessee) :

…(Guj) and in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab P. Ltd. vide order dated October 23, 2012, passed in Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2012-since reported in [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Guj). The view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd) came to be approved. If the entire purchases were wholly bogus and there was a finding of fact on record that no purchases were made at all, counsel for the Revenue would be justified in arguing that the entire amount of such bogus purchases should be added back to the income of the assessee. Such were the facts in the case of Asst. (CIT) (O…

Asst CIT 14(1), Mumbai vs. Kantilal C Jain, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11 Asst. Cit-14(1), Shri Kantilal C. Jain 2Nd Floor, Earnest House, M/S. Shailesh Jewellers बनाम/ Nariman Point, Shop No. 4, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 108/112, Ustad Building, Zaveri Bazar, Opp. Khara Kuwa, Mumbai-400 002 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aadpj 9583 E

…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 31(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Bharatkumar Nagraj Jain, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Years: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Mr. Bharatkumar Nagraj (Erstwhile Income Tax Officer- Jain, बनाम/ 24(3)(4), Proprietor Of N.R. Vs. R. No.705, C-11, 7Th Floor, Computech, 23/11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Jawahar Nagar, B.K.C. Bandra (East), Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400063 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Acwpj1720C C.O. No.07/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2608/Mum/2015) Assessment Years: 2009-10 Mr. Bharatkumar Nagraj Jain, Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Proprietor Of N.R. Computech, (Erstwhile Income Tax बनाम/ 23/11, Jawahar Nagar, Officer-24(3)(4), Vs. Goregaon (East), R. No.705, C-11, 7Th Floor, Mumbai-400063 Pratyakshkar Bhavan, B.K.C. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Acwpj1720C C.O. No.06 To 08/Mum/2017 Bharat Kumar Nagraj Jain Assessment Years: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer-31(2)(3), Mr. Bharatkumar Nagraj (Erstwhile Income Tax Officer- Jain, बनाम/ 24(3)(4), Proprietor Of N.R. Vs. R. No.705, C-11, 7Th Floor, Computech, 23/11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Jawahar Nagar, B.K.C. Bandra (East), Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400063 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Acwpj1720C

…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…

Shekasa Engineering Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Shekasa Engineering Co. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd., Circle-8(2)(1), बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, 182/186, Metal Room No.670, Vs. House, Kalbadevi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Cotton Exchange, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400002 Mumbai-400002 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan No.:-Aaacs7426F "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Satish Mody Shri V. Justin-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 14/09/2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2017 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: आदेश / O R D E R

…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…

ACIT Cir 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Taprath Polymers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2996/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit Circle 11(3)(1), M/S. Taprath Polymers Pvt. R. No. 204, Aayakar Bhavan Ltd. 305/306, Belscot 2Nd Floor, M.K. Marg, बिधम/ Tower, Link Road, Mumbai-400 020 Lokhandwala Complex, Vs. Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabct7989D (अपीलाथी/Revenue) (प्रत्यथी / Assessee) :

…m the open/grey market. The CIT(A) thereafter relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble High court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth (2013) (38 taxaman.com 385) (Guj), and the order of the ITAT, Ahemadabad Bench, in the case of the Vijay Protiens (58 ITD 428), therein concluded that the addition in the hands of the assessee was liable to be restricted to the extent of the profit element embedded in making the purchases from the open/grey market, which could fairly be taken at 12.5% of the aggregate value of the bogus purchases of Rs. 34,81,845/-. The CIT(A) thus on the basis of his aforesaid observati…

ITO 15(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Yogiraj Powertech P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 15(3)(2) V. M/S. Yogiraj Powertech Pvt Ltd. Room No.15 B, Ground Floor, 2Nd Floor, B-2,8,9 &10 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Groma House, Plot No.14C, Mumbai – 400 020 Sector 19, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 705

…ax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders vs. ITO [IT appeal Nos. 2801 & 2937 (Ahd) of 2008, dated 20-05-2011] and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. Asstt.CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). On appeal by the Department, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held as follows: M/s. Yogiraj Powertech Pvt Ltd. "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 h…

ITO 15(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Ravindra Ganesh Nene, Navi Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

…ax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders vs. ITO [IT appeal Nos. 2801 & 2937 (Ahd) of 2008, dated 20-05-2011] and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. Asstt.CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). On appeal by the Department, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held as follows: "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 r…

Asst CIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ravindra Ganesh Nene, Navi Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

…ax. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of Sanket Steel Traders vs. ITO [IT appeal Nos. 2801 & 2937 (Ahd) of 2008, dated 20-05-2011] and also made reference to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. Asstt.CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). On appeal by the Department, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held as follows: "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 r…

ITO 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. T M Mohamedally, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Years: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-14(2)(2), M/S T M Mohamedally Room No.304, 3Rd Floor, Hararwala Bldg. बनाम/ Earnest House, 112, Lohar Chawl, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400002 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) Pan No.:-Aacft2448M

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘ ई’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri JOGINDER SINGH, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member Assessment Years: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-14(2)(2), M/s T M Mohamedally Room No.304, 3rd Floor, Hararwala Bldg. बनाम/ Earnest House, 112, Lohar Chawl, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400002 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) PAN No.:-AACFT2448M Shri V. Justin-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by None 11/09/2017…

Kshitj Interiors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1)(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…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…

DCIT 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Acon Measurement P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit -9(1))(1), M/S Acon Measurement Pvt. Room No.260A, 02Nd Floor बनाम/ Limited, Aayakar Bhavan A-22, Nanddham Indl. Estate, Vs. M.K. Road Marol Maroshi Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (East), Mumbai-400059 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaca5078K

…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…