“bogus purchases”

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-10(1)(1), Mumbai vs. H.K.Jewels Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, sans merit

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5659/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2010-11) Acit -10(1)(1), 2Nd Floor, Room No. 209, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ...... अपीलाथ) /Appellant Mumbai-400020 बनाम Vs. H.K. Jewels Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Wicel Administration Building, Central Road, Opp. Seepz, Midc, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093. Pan: Aacch2454E ..... *ितवाद,/Respondent अपीलाथ) -ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Sushil Kumar Mishra *ितवाद, -ारा/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क. ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 30/03/2021 घोषणा क. ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 11/06/2021 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, J.M: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 20.06.2019 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11. आअसं. 5659/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2010-11) 2. The Brief Facts As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is A Manufacturer & Trader Of Gold & Diamond Jewellery. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Found That The Assessee Is Involved In Obtaining Accommodation Entries Aggregating To Rs. 4,95,084/- From M/S Amit Trading Co., A Declared Hawala Operator. During Assessment Proceedings, The Assessee Failed To Substantiate Genuineness Of Purchases & The Aforesaid Dealer. The Ao Made Addition Of Entire Alleged Bogus Purchases. The Assessee Carry The Issue In Appeal Before The Cit(A). The Cit(A) After Examining The Facts & Various Decisions Rendered By Hon’Ble High Court & The Tribunal Restricted The Addition To 15% Of Alleged Bogus Purchases. Hence, The Present Appeal By The Revenue.

hawala operator. During assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to substantiate genuineness of purchases and the aforesaid dealer. The AO made addition of entire alleged bogus purchases. The assessee carry the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) after examining the facts and various decisions rendered ... High Court and the Tribunal restricted the addition to 15% of alleged bogus purchases. Hence, the present appeal by the Revenue. 3. Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra representing the Department submitted that the assessee has failed to prove genuineness of suspicious purchases and the dealer from whom such purchases were made

ITO 21(1)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Campbell Electronics, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5511/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2009-10) Ito -21(1)(4), Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, Room No. 108, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ...... अपीलाथ) /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S Campbell Electronics Unit No. 9, Prabhadevi Indl. Estate, V.S. Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. Pan: Aacfc4531G ..... *ितवाद,/Respondent अपीलाथ) -ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Sushil Kumar Mishra *ितवाद, -ारा/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क. ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 30/03/2021 घोषणा क. ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 11/06/2021 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, J.M: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’]' Dated 20.06.2019 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10. आअसं. 5511/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2009-10) 2. The Brief Facts As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is A Manufacturer & Trader Of Pharmaceutical Testing Equipments. The Assessment For Ay 2009-10 In The Case Of Assessee Was Re-Opened On The Ground That The Assessee Has Obtained Bogus Purchase Bills Amounting To Rs. 3,61,932/- From Two Entry Providers I.E.

testing equipments. The assessment for AY 2009-10 in the case of assessee was re-opened on the ground that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs. 3,61,932/- from two entry providers i.e. (i) M/s Hardik Metal Corporation Rs. 2,599/- (ii) Apple Steel ... aforesaid dealers, however, the same were returned back unserved by the postal authorities. The AO made addition of entire alleged bogus purchases. Against the assessment order dated 03.11.2014 passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before

ITO-28(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Shirnivas Yankaiyya Gangapuram, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Ito-28(3)(2) Shrinivas Yankaiyya Gangapuram Room No.323, 3Rd Floor, 6Th Tower 2602, Bhumi Colossa, Sector 19 Vashi Railwasy Station Complex Vs. Airoli, Navi Mumbai-400 708 Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703

erred in deleting the addition of Rs.3,19,910/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that parties from whom these purchases were made proven accommodation entry providers, as concluded by Sales Tax Authorities pursuant to the investigation carried out by them ... case of N.K. Protein Ltd Vs.DCIT (769 OF 2017), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has confirmed 100% addition made on account of bogus purchases ? (3) The appellant prays that the order of Ld.CIT(A) on the above grounds be reversed and that of the Assessing officer be restored

Asst CIT 17 (2), Mumbai vs. Shri. Jayant Nandlal Sheth, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.8063/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit-17(2) Shri Jayant Nandlal Sheth Room No.116, 1St Floor 26, Mandvi Chambers, 3Rd Floor बिाम/ Kautilya Bhawan, G-Block 184 Samuel Street Vs. Near Videsh Bhawan, Bkc Mumbai-400 009 Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No.Aadps-7502-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Sethi-Ld.Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : None सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2021 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10/06/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): -

Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [in short CIT(A) ] dated 31/10/2019 which has provided certain relief to the assessee on account of alleged bogus purchases. 2. Though none appeared for assessee, however, material on record was sufficient for disposal of the appeal. The Ld. DR pleaded for restoration of assessment ... 09/03/2015. Pursuant to receipt of certain information from DGIT (Inv.) / Sales Tax Department, Mumbai, it transpired that the assessee made alleged bogus purchases of Rs.8.96 Lacs from an entity namely M/s Jindal Metal Corporation. Accordingly, the assessee was required to file requisite details to substantiate these purchases. 3.2 In support

ITO 33 (1)(8), Mumbai vs. Shri. Sandeep Pramodkumar Gulati, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, being devoid of any merit

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7698/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2011-12) Ito -33 (1)(8), Room No. 919, 9Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E)-400051 ...... अपीलाथ) /Appellant

received, the assessee had obtained accommodation entries amounting to Rs. 8,68,015/- from M/s Ankit Enterprises. The AO made addition on entire alleged bogus purchases. Against the assessment order dated 21.12.2018, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) after examining the facts restricted the addition ... bogus purchases. Against the findings of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal. 3. Shri Sanjay J. Sethi representing the Department vehemently defended the assessment order. In support of his submissions, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of N.K. Proteins

ITO 26 (3)(7), Mumbai vs. Shri. Varghese George Padipurackal, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, being devoid of any merit

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7696/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2010-11) Ito -26(3)(7), Room No. 418, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E)-400051 ...... अपीलाथ) /Appellant

assessee is engaged in trading of Pipes and Pipe fittings. The AO made addition of Rs. 20,32,677/- on account of alleged bogus purchases from three dealers during the period relevant to AY under appeal. The AO made addition on entire alleged bogus purchases. The assessee filed appeal against ... dated 23.03.2015. The CIT(A) after examining the facts restricted the addition to Rs. 2,54,087/- by estimating GP of 12.5% on alleged bogus purchases, the same has been accepted by the assessee. 3. Per contra, Shri Sajnay Sethi representing the Department vehemently defended the assessment order and prayed

ITO 20 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Adamji & Co., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7677/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2010-11) Ito -20 (1)(1), Room No. 124, 1St Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ...... अपीलाथ) /Appellant

transport receipt, inward register, stock register, etc. was furnished by the assessee. The AO made disallowance by estimating Gross Profit (GP) @ 12.5% on bogus purchases. Thus, an addition of Rs. 3,26,216/- was made on account of bogus purchases. Against the assessment order dated 06.01.2016 passed under section ... appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) after considering the GP rate declared by the assessee restricted the addition to 5% of the bogus purchases. Hence, the present appeal by the Revenue. आअसं. 7677/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2010-11) 5. Shri Sanjay J. Sethi representing the Department vehemently

Dy CIT 1 (3)92), Mumbai vs. M/S Toshvin Analytical Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Dcit-1(3)(2) M/S. Toshvin Analytical Private 540, Aaykar Bhawan Limited M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 103, S.J.House, Sitaram Mills Vs. Compound, N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel(E) Mumbai-400 011

penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the I.T. Act, levied on the addition of Rs. 53,26,539/-made on account of bogus purchases which was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) and subsequently restricted to Rs. 3,53,388/- by the Hon'ble ITAT against which the assessee ... issue arising out of the above appeal is the deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) with respect to estimated addition for bogus purchase of Rs.3,53,388/-. 2 7505/Mum/2019 4. The brief facts of the case leading to the levy of penalty are as under:- In this case

Dy CIT Circle-3, Thane vs. M/S Zen Engineering, Thane

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

existent vendors by means of relevant supporting documents related to movement of goods, stock register, etc. to restrict the addition to 25% of bogus purchases from the non-existent vendors. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

ITO, Ward - 3(2), Thane vs. Rammangal S.Gupta, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 147 of the Act computing assessed income at ` 68,08,234, after making ad–hoc addition of ` 63,53,010 on account of bogus purchases made from six parties. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income ... appellant and material placed on record. In the quantum appeal, the then CIT(A)-2, Nashik has restricted the disallowance @ 10% of bogus purchases of Rs. 61,90,074/-. 4 Rammangal S. Gupta Against the order of the CIT-(A)-2, Nashik, appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed

Dy CIT 6 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Della Technica Interior Design Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

against the returned income at ` 9,87,27,550. In the assessment so made, the Assessing Officer made disallowance on account of bogus purchase amounting to ` 3,56,16,927, being 100% of such bogus purchase made from 25 parties who had indulged in issuing the bogus purchase bill ... learned Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal, wherein the Co–ordinate Bench has restricted the disallowance @ 8% of such bogus purchase which quantifies to ` 28,49,354, and given partial quantum relief of ` 3,27,67,573, to the assessee. Consequent to the order passed

ACIT 28 (2), Mumbai vs. M/S Redstar, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

determining total income at ` 55,03,420, thereby making addition under section 69C of the Act at ` 3,71,437, on account of bogus purchase made by the assessee. The assessee has not contested the quantum addition of ` 3,71,437, made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus ... against levy of penalty of Rs. 2,22,560/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO had added the 12.5% of the bogus purchases at Rs. 3,71,437/- to the total income of the assessee. The appellant did not contest the order of the A0. Subsequently

ACIT, Circle - 32 (3), Mumbai vs. Ravikiran Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

judicial precedents as detailed above. The contentions of the appellant have been considered carefully. The Ld. AO had made the addition on account of bogus purchases at RS.26,39,791/-. However, the Ld. ClT(A) has restricted the same to 38.5% of such purchases/ accommodation entries. The facts ... deleted the penalty levied u/s 271 (1 )(c) of the Act, where the addition u/s 69C of the Act was made on account of bogus purchases, on the ground that the assessee made a claim which was bonafide and the same was coupled with documentary evidences but the same remained

Ganpat Metals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 5 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 6427/मुं/2019 (िन.व.2009-10) M/S Ganpati Metals Pvt. Ltd. Shop No.3, Cigratwala Building, 364, S.V.P. Road, Mumbai-400004. Pan: Aaccg3300Q ...... अपीलाथ) /Appellant

opened on the basis of information received from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. As per the information received, assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills aggregating to Rs. 84,38,977/- from six dealers declared as hawala operators. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section ... register and stock register, etc. were produced by the assessee to prove trail of goods. The AO estimated Gross Profit (GP) at 12.5% on bogus purchases and made addition of Rs. 10,54,872/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 27.03.2015 passed under section 143(3) read with section

ITO 13 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Reinfibre Products India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Assessing Officer received information from the Sales Tax Department indicating that the assessee is a beneficiary of accommodation entries provided by hawala operators through bogus purchase bills, and hence, the Assessing Officer re–opened the assessment under section 147 of the Act and made addition ... appeal before the first appellate authority wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) granted partial relief to the assessee by restricting the addition on account of bogus purchase at a flat rate of 6%. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal wherein

ITO-22(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Shri Gokul Govind Sandha, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5883/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito-22(1)(5) Shri Gokul Govind Sandha Room No.323, 3Rd Floor Winter Wear Gala 2B & 3C Fr बिाम/ Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug Demellow Chawl Vs. Parel, Mumbai - 400012 Near Hanuman Temple, Khotwadi Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Avkps-0355-D (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Sethi-Ld.Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : None सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2021 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10/06/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): -

Income Tax (Appeals)-55, Mumbai [in short CIT(A) ] dated 20/06/2019 which has provided certain relief to the assessee on account of alleged bogus purchases. 2. Though none appeared for assessee, however, material on record was sufficient for disposal of the appeal. The Ld. DR pleaded for restoration of assessment ... However, pursuant to receipt of certain information from DGIT (Inv.) / Sales Tax Department, Mumbai, it transpired that the assessee made alleged bogus purchases of Rs.25,200/- from an entity namely M/s Shivraj Traders. Accordingly, the case was reopened as per due process of law and the assessee was required

ITO 22 (2)(4), Mumbai vs. Shri. Nirmal Kumar Parasmal Jain, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5710/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2011-12) Income Tax Officer-22(2)(4), 310, 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

prove genuineness of the purchases and the said dealer. Thus, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,46,983/- by estimating profit margin on bogus purchases @ 25%. 3. Against the assessment order dated 27/2/2016 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before ... case and considering various decisions rendered by the Hon'ble High Courts and various Benches of the Tribunal, restricted the addition to 12.5% of bogus purchases. I find no infirmity in the impugned order, the same is upheld and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed, sans merit. Order pronounced

ITO 22 (1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Gold Coin Fashion, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5705/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2010-11) Income Tax Officer-22(1)(5), 323, 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

Representative heard, orders of authorities below examined. The assessee is in the business of manufacturing and trading of readymade garments. The assessee had obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs.1,77,408/- from M/s. Sakhti Trading Company, a declared hawala operator. In assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer made addition ... Rs.44,352/- by estimating 25% margin of profit on bogus purchases. In First Appellate proceedings the CIT(A) restricted the addition at 12.5% on bogus purchases. The assessee has declared G.P of 14.05% for the relevant period. In my considered view estimation of G.P by Assessing Officer is very much

ITO 22 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mahendra L Shah (HUF), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5701/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2011-12) The Ito-22(2)(2), Room No.309, 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Mahendra L. Shah (Huf), 501, 5Th Floor, Silicon Valley, J.K.Mehta Road, Santacruz (West), Mumbai 400 054 Pan: Aaghs 5538B ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

case of assessee for assessment year 2011-12 was reopened. As per information received, the assessee had obtained bogus purchase bills aggregating to Rs.27,72,009/- from six dealers declared as hawala operators. During assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to discharge his onus in proving genuineness of purchases ... receipt, inward register, stock register, etc. was furnished by the assessee to prove trail of goods. The Assessing Officer estimated 25% G.P on the bogus purchases and made addition of Rs.6,93,002/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 30/12/2015 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s

M/S Simoni Gems, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT CC 2 (1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5686/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2011-12) M/S. Simoni Gems, 36, Shreeji Arcade, Tata Road No.1 & 2, Opera House, Mumbai 400 004. Pan: Aakfs 8874J ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

Assessing Officer and CIT(A) disbelieved the same. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.6,33,547/- by estimating G.P @ 8% on alleged bogus purchases. The CIT(A) has upheld the same. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee further contended that additions of similar reasons were made in assessment ... reason to take a different view. Following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case, the addition on account of bogus purchases is deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on Thursday, the 10th day of June, 2021 (VIKAS AWASTHY