How many judgments cite Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT?

430 judgments on BharatTax cite Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (58 ITD 428), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 69C, Section 145(3), Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 142(1).

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 366,005 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 147 Section 69C Section 145(3)Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 133A Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 145(3)section 69c accommodation entry section 69 business section 13 document company section 148 total income section 147 section 143(3)

Judgments citing Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

Dinesh Haldia, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 384/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 153ASection 260ASection 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 384/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2007-08 cuke Shri Dinesh Haldia DCIT, Vs. 150, Haldia House, Circle-01, Jaipur Johari Bazar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAKPH 9237 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dheeraj Borad, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvi…

Harisons Steel Limited, Wada Thane vs. Dy CIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 3957/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Biswanath Das

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sessee had taken accommodation entries and alleged purchases were not genuine. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of M/s. Sanjay Oil Cake Industries Vs. CIT (10 DTR 153) and Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of M/s. Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. ACIT (58 ITD 428) has extensively dealt with this issue and came to conclusion that disallowance of 25% of impugned purchases would suffice the matter Similarly, the Hon'ble Jaipur Tribunal in the case of Deepak Dalela Vs. ITO (50 DTR 502) had extensively dealt with this issue. However, in the Misc Application filed before it, the Hon'ble Jaipur Tribunal in the ca…

Harisons Steel Ltd, Wada Thane vs. DCIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 3943/MUM/2023[AY 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Biswanath Das

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Income Tax Officer, Kalyan vs. J D Electric Works, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4521/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, J D Electric Works, Rani Mansion Murbad Raod, Manik Colony Opp Raja Hotel Kalyan West-421301. Vs. Ahilyabai Chowk, Kalyan West-421301. PAN NO. AAAFJ 9100 C Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Shashank Mehta Revenue by : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 02/05/2024 : 06/05/2024 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 26.…

Ravi Haldia, C/O Haldia Multipoint House vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 65/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Board (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) a

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 260A

…ealers which are totally unverifiable with reference to rates or the price, cannot be allowed as deduction. 4.11 Considering these facts, it will be appropriate to rely upon the decision of Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT in the case of M/s. Vijay Protein Ltd vs. ACIT 58 ITD 428 and also the case of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s Sanjay Oil Cake Industries vsCIT 316 ITR 274 and to confirm the disallowance to the extent of 25% of the unverifiable purchase which will include in the instant case as cash and URD purchase totaling to Rs. 15,903/- and other unverifiable purchases from registered dealer totaling t…

Ravi Haldia, Haldia Multipoint House vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 64/JPR/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Board (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) a

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 260A

M/S. B. J. Cotton Industries, Vadodara vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1320/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1320/Ahd/2018 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 M/S. B.J Cotton Industries D.C.I.T, Modasar Char Rasta, Vs. Circle-3(1), At Modasar, Vadodara. Po Bodeli, Ta. Sankheda, Dist. Baroda-391135./ Anil R. Shah (C.A) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor, B/H. M.J Library, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aagfb3067J

For Appellant: Ms Kinjal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.D.R

Section 133ASection 69A

…milar view in the case of CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and in the case of CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab (P.) Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 290 (Guj). The view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) came to be approved. 8. 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 Pawanraj B…

JCIT (OSD) Central Cirlce-26, New Delhi vs. P L Computer & Communication Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 833/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 153C

…) (Bom.)  CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451) (Guj.)  CIT Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. in ITA 1090 of 2009, order dated 10.01.2011  CIT Vs. Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt. Ltd. in ITA 63 of 2012, order dated 23.10.2012  Vijay Proteins Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (58 ITD 428)  CIT Vs. M/s Nangalia Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. (220 Taxmann 17) (Guj.)  Prakash Chand Mehta Vs. CIT (301 ITR 134) (M.P.)  CIT Vs. SMC Share Brokerts Ltd. (288 ITR 345) (Del.)  CIT Vs. S. M. Aggarwal (293 ITR 43) (Del.)  Sai Lifestyles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 4465, 4310, 4466, 4311, 4467/2010 dated 25.11.2011  ACIT Vs. K.P. Sanghvi & Sons LL…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Surat vs. Sunil Mittal HUF, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 520/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.520/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Sunil Mittal Huf, Ward – 1(3)(1), 101, Mahadev Park, Kailash Nagar, Surat Ghod Dod Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aamhs7185Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 15/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2023

Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69ASection 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.520/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) The ITO, Vs. Sunil Mittal HUF, Ward – 1(3)(1), 101, Mahadev Park, Kailash Nagar, Surat Ghod Dod Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAMHS7185Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Appellant by Shri Kiran K. Shah, CA Respondent by Date of Hearing 15/12/2023 Date of Pronouncement 21/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to Assessment Y…

Ram Chand Panjwani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 151/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 151/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ram Chand Panjwani M/S. Gurunanak Rice Mill, Vill : Tulshi, P.O. Tilda, Neora, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Afbpp5595D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)

…,000/- as bogus. 5. After treating the impugned purchases in question as bogus the A.O rejected the books of accounts of the assessee u/s.145(3) of the Act. The A.O by relying on the order of the ITAT, Ahmadabad in the case of Vijay Proteins Vs. ACIT, (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.), and impliedly being of the view that the assessee had purchased the goods in question not from the aforementioned tainted parties from whom only bills were procured for routing the same through his books of account, but had procured such goods at a discounted value from the open/grey market, thus, disallowed 25% of the value of bogus purch…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Hh Interior & Auto Components Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2847/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay

Section 133ASection 143(3)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 5 I.T.A. No. 2847/Del/2022 bogus is essentially a question of fact. The Tribunal having examined the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the assessee…

Dinesh Kumar Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO, Balotra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 374/JODH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.374/Jodh/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…to be not genuine. Reliance is placed on the following decision: a) ITO v. Eagle Impex (ITA no 5697/Mum/2010 (AY. 2003-04) Bench "H" Dt. 22-02- 2013(Unreported): "In appeal CIT (A) following the ratio of Ahmedabad Tribunal in Vijay Proteins Ltd v. ACIT (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd)(Trib) disallowed only 25% of purchases. Assessee and department filed appeal to the Tribunal. Tribunal held that the assessee has discharged the primary onus which laid upon the assessee, though the assessee failed to put up the any appearance of the parties before the AO. It was upon the AO to prove that the documents are not genuine. AO ne…

ITO-20(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Saheb Ali Khan, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2128/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…dded in such purchases would be subjected to tax The Hon'ble Tribunal relied its earlier decision in the case of M/s Saket Steel Traders Vs. ITO (ITA No, 2801/Ahd/2008 dt.20/05/2008) and also made reference to the decision in the case of Vijaya Protein vs CIT 58 ITD 428(Ahd). 5.5 In the instant case, the appellant is not in a position to prove the existence of the suppliers. There are enough circumstantial evidences casting a doubt on the nature of the transaction. I am of the opinion that the appellant had made cash purchases from other parties which were not recorded in the books. The appellant took only bills…

Neeta Prakash Bavishi, Mumbai vs. National Faeless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1844/MUM/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhneeta Prakash Bavishi Vs. Ito 21/C, Sai Darshan, 6Th Ward – 22(2)(4), Floor, Above Akbar Allys Piramal Chambers, Santacruz West, Mumbai 400012 Mumbai – 400054 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafpb0332D Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Hero RaiFor Respondent: Prakash Kishinchandani

Section 148

…x department that they were involved in providing accommodation entries. Therefore, 25% of such purchases to the amount of Rs.370,630/- was treated as non-genuine purchases by the assessing officer after following the decision of M/s Vijay Protein Ltd. (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). The AO stated that sale sales Tax Department has proved that the said parties were providing accommodation entries. 3. The assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Inspite of issuing of number of notices the assessee has not made any compliance at the time of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), therefore the ld. CIT(A) has…

Suresh Sharma, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 36/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 36/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…the impugned purchases of Rs. 31,00,000/- under consideration as bogus rejected the books of accounts of the assessee u/s.145(3) of the Act. Thereafter, the A.O by relying on the order of the ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (1996) 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) was of the view that the assessee company had purchased the goods in question not from the aforementioned tainted party from whom only bills were procured for routing the same through his books of account but had procured such goods at a discounted value from the open/grey market. Accordingly, the A.O on the basis of his aforesaid convictio…

Abhay Chordia, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 291/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Deeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69C

…. There are several judgementswhere even 100 per cent of the bogus purchases is confirmed. Therefore, addition of 25% of the impugned purchases is found to be reasonable. Similar addition was upheld in the case of M/s. Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.). Therefore the addition made by AO with regard to 25 percent of the bogus purchases and the commission expenditure of Rs. 6,400 for taking such accommodation entries is confirmed.” The position of law is made clear by the Hon'ble Supreme Court even for Assessment Years prior to 2021-22. Accordingly as per law the amount of PF and ESI which…

M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7289/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR

Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITO-6(1)(1), M/s A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5th floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AABCA 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., ITO-6(1)(1), C/o M/s Jayesh Sanghrajka and Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. LLP, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5th floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, DS Phalke Road, Dadar Lines,…

ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5718/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR

Section 148Section 151

ITO-22 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. Nilesh Chandrakant Vora, Mumbai

ITA 435/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Govind Menon

Section 143(3)Section 147

…R 13,12,280/- on account of bogus purchases holding that 25% of the bogus purchases should be disallowed by placing reliance on the decision of the Ahmadabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. Assistant 4 Commissioner of Income Tax: 58 ITD 428 (Ahd). Being aggrieved, the Assessee carried the issue in appeal before 8. CIT(A). The Assessee challenged the above ad-hoc disallowance of 25% of alleged bogus purchase contending as under: (a) The purchases made by the Assessee were genuine. (b) During the assessment proceedings the Assessee has filed detailed submissions clearly showing tha…

Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Maharashtra vs. ITO Wasrd-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -1(1)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -3(3)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) With Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 22/03/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 & A Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…the case as laid down in the decision of Gauhati High court in the case of Assam Pesticides and Agro Checmicals vs CIT reported in 227 ITR 384. Here, reference is also invited to the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of M/s. Vijay Proteins Ltd. reported in 55 TTJ 76 wherein, owing to non-verifiable purchases. 25% of the sum of purchases was held to be reasonable amount of disallowance of expenditure. Accordingly, 25% of the total purchases is appropriate for disallowance. 5.1 I, therefore, disallow 25% of total unverifiable purchases of Rs.95,17,07,336/- which is worked out to Rs.23,79,26,834/- and added the s…