“permanent account number”

ITO-41(2)(1), Mumbai, Bkc Mumbai vs. Chhaganlal Pukharajji Parmar, Bhandup (W)

In the result appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 2691/M/2023 for assessment year 2010 – 11 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

purchases and there were no goods transacted. Merely because the assessee has made payment through account by cheques and those parties are having permanent account number does not prove the genuineness of the purchases. However several judicial precedents have been relied upon by the learned CIT – A of coordinate benches

ITO 41(2)(1), Mumbai, Bkc Mumbai vs. Chhaganlal Pukharajji Parmar, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 2691/M/2023 for assessment year 2010 – 11 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

purchases and there were no goods transacted. Merely because the assessee has made payment through account by cheques and those parties are having permanent account number does not prove the genuineness of the purchases. However several judicial precedents have been relied upon by the learned CIT – A of coordinate benches

Saptarshi Realtors Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 8 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Saptarshi Realtors Private The Income Tax Officer Limited Ward 8(1)(1) Room No.651, 6Th Floor, 5, 40-45 Kamar Mansion, Aaykar Bhavan, Nanabhai Raralkar Marg, Vs. M.K. Road, Paral Village, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm6828M Saptarshi Realtors Private The Income Tax Officer Limited Ward 8(1)(1) Room No.651, 6Th Floor, 5, 40-45 Kamar Mansion, Nanabhai Raralkar Marg, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Paral Village, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Advocate Devendra Jain, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024

year. These loans are taken by the assessee from nine different parties. With respect to these parties, the assessee submitted confirmation of loan, permanent account number of the lenders, and bank account of the lenders. In case of some of the lenders the copy of the income tax return filed ... reason is that in most of the case is only ITA No. 3291 & 3293/Mum/2022 M/s Saptarshi Relators Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 13-14 the permanent account number is submitted and bank statement of the lender shows that in their bank statement there are no major transactions. It is also the claim

DCIT Central Circle - 6(1), Mumbai vs. Gnp Consultancy and Solutions Private Limited, Thane

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Expenses 12586500 10468900 23055400 014. During assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to provide explanation of each entry along with the name, permanent account number and address of the parties involved. The documentary evidence in support of the claim were also asked. The assessee submitted that ... mentioned. The assessee was asked to provide the details of explanation of each entry along with the name, permanent account number and address of the parties involved along with the documentary evidence. The assessee submitted that that the above document belongs to Mr. Patil and that only some

Gnp Consultancy and Solutions Pvt Ltd, Nariman Point vs. DCIT Circle-6(1), Mumbai, Nariman Point

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Gnp Consultancy & Dcit Solutions Private Limited Central Circle-6(1) Room No.1905, 19 Th Floor, Plot No.91, Shop No.1 Channel Classic Chs Sector Air India Building, Nariman Vs. Point 4 Kopar Khairne, Thane Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 709 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aadcg3716B Gnp Consultancy & Dcit Solutions Private Limited Central Circle-6(1) Plot No.91, Shop No.1 Room No.1905, 19 Th Floor, Channel Classic Chs Sector Air India Building, Nariman Vs. Point 4 Kopar Khairne, Thane Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 709 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2024

site Expenses 12586500 10468900 23055400 014. During assessment proceedings, the assessee was required to provide explanation of each entry along with the name, permanent account number and address of the parties involved. The documentary evidence in support of the claim were also asked. The assessee submitted that ... mentioned. The assessee was asked to provide the details of explanation of each entry along with the name, permanent account number and address of the parties involved along with the documentary evidence. The assessee submitted that that the above document belongs to Mr. Patil and that only some

M/S Star Brillian, Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT -19(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Star Brilliant; A.Y. 09-10 & 13-14 are stated to be bogus by the learned Assessing Officer, assessee has produced their invoices, their permanent account number, their income tax returns, confirmation to show that purchases are genuine. Further, it is the claim of the assessee that whatever goods are purchased

M/S Star Brillian, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Star Brilliant; A.Y. 09-10 & 13-14 are stated to be bogus by the learned Assessing Officer, assessee has produced their invoices, their permanent account number, their income tax returns, confirmation to show that purchases are genuine. Further, it is the claim of the assessee that whatever goods are purchased

Umesh Ambikaprasad Mishra, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs NR Portfolio Pvt Ltd [2013) 29 taxmann.com 291 (Delhi) has held that Permanent Account Number is allotted as a facility to revenue to keep track of transactions. The PA Number cannot be blindly and without consideration of surrounding circumstances treated

Umesh A Mishra, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs NR Portfolio Pvt Ltd [2013) 29 taxmann.com 291 (Delhi) has held that Permanent Account Number is allotted as a facility to revenue to keep track of transactions. The PA Number cannot be blindly and without consideration of surrounding circumstances treated

M/S. Shairu Gems Diamonds Pvt Ltd. Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Dcit, M/S Shairu Gems Diamonds Pvt. Central Circle 2(1) Ltd. Room No.804, 8Th Floor, De-9012A, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Old Cgo Complex Annex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aatcs5148R Assessee By : Shri Harsh Kapadia & Ms. Ritu Punjabi, Adv Revenue By : Ms. Bhumika Patel, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2024

vouchers etc are in the possession of the assessee. The HR manager has given a complete statement stating the names of the wives, permanent account number, address, amount of salary and date of joining and date of leaving along with the address. Ms Shairu Gems Diamonds ... wives of 14 different employees to whom bogus vouchers are prepared. The explanation is so detailed, stating the name of the bogus employees, permanent account number, their date of joining, their date of leaving and address of the parties. In question no.15, he explained that the vouchers are specifically prepared

Goreshwar Gramin Multistate Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Ahmednagar vs. ACIT- Central Circle 2-(1), Mumbai

In the result, ITA number 2145/M/2022 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Assessee has accepted unsecured loan of ₹14,33,45,343/-, the learned Assessing Officer asked the assessee to substantiate the name, address, permanent account number and confirmation of the parties. Despite opportunities none appeared on behalf of the assessee and no reply was filed. The learned Assessing Officer made addition ... statements only. The learned CIT (A) also found instances that in the detail submitted by the assessee of the various cash deposits, the permanent account number and Adhar Number are either blank or submitted as farmer. Therefore, an addition made by the learned Assessing Officer was confirmed. The assessee also

Goreshwar Gramin Multistate Co.Op. Cr. Soc, Ahmednagar vs. ACIT, CC- 2 (1), Mumbai

In the result, ITA number 2145/M/2022 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Assessee has accepted unsecured loan of ₹14,33,45,343/-, the learned Assessing Officer asked the assessee to substantiate the name, address, permanent account number and confirmation of the parties. Despite opportunities none appeared on behalf of the assessee and no reply was filed. The learned Assessing Officer made addition ... statements only. The learned CIT (A) also found instances that in the detail submitted by the assessee of the various cash deposits, the permanent account number and Adhar Number are either blank or submitted as farmer. Therefore, an addition made by the learned Assessing Officer was confirmed. The assessee also