“bogus purchases”

Shri. Narpat H Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Shri Narpat H. Mehta Ito-19(2)(4) Gr. Floor, 48 Noor Mangil 54, Mumbai 6Th Kumbharwada T.P. Street, Vs. Mumbai-400 004

appeal by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has erred in sustaining 12.5% disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 29.05.2019 pertaining to respective assessment year 2009-10. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee in this case ... ferrous metal. The Assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the sales tax department that assessee has made bogus purchases amounting to Rs.88,94,906/-. The assessee submitted the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However, the suppliers were not produced before

ITO 32(2)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Mahadev Steel House, Palghar

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Revenue has challenged the order of Ld. CIT(A) wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has partly sustained the addition @ 12.5% of the bogus purchases as against the 22% made by the AO on account of bogus purchases. M/s. Mahadev Steel House 3. The brief facts of the case are that ... basis of information received from sales tax department to the effect that assessee has taken hawala bogus purchase entries to the tune of Rs. 1,78,088/-, the re-assessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act dated

ITO 28 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sharwansinghatar Singh Chatarsingh Chundawat, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal: A.Y : 2009-10 Income Tax Officer – 28(3)(2), Vs. Sharwansinghatar Singh Mumbai. (Appellant) Chatarsingh Chundawat (Prop. New Bharat Tools) Shop No. 2, Plot No. 80, Sector-24, Nr. Bank Of India, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai 400 705. Pan : Afwpc2763H (Respondent)

vide order dated Nil. 2. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) restricting the disallowance of bogus purchases to the extent of 12.5% as against 100% made by the Assessing Officer. For this, the Revenue has raised the following two effective grounds ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the A.O to restrict the addition of bogus purchases to 12.5% as against 100% addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that parties from whom these purchases

DCIT - Circle- 3 Thane, Mumbai vs. Shankar Krishna Kelkar, Thane

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2509/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-Circle-3 Shri Shankar Krishna Kelkar Room No.02, 6Th Floor Prop- M/S Standard Diesel बनाम Ashar It Park, B-Wing Vishwas Hospital Basement / Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate, Road No.16Z Behind Ghantali Temple Thane(W), Thane-400 0604 Naupada, Thane(W)-400 062 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abbpk-8636-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri T.S. Khalsa- Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 01/02/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 01 /02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

under consideration u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 06/02/2015, wherein the assessee was saddled with certain additions of Rs.12.88 Lacs on account of alleged bogus purchases. Consequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) in the assessment order against those additions for concealing the particulars of income or furnishing

DCIT, Circle- 3, Thane vs. Sip Tools, Thane

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2507/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2508/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Circle-3 M/S. Sip Tools Room No.02, 6Th Floor 307, Anant Laxmi Chambers बनाम Ashar It Park, B-Wng Shivaji Nagar, Naupada / Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate, Road No.16Z Thane(W) Thane(W), Thane-400 0604. . "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaefs-8001-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri T.S. Khalsa- Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 01/02/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 01/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

under consideration u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 11/02/2015, wherein the assessee was saddled with certain additions of Rs.7.67 Lacs on account of alleged bogus purchases. Consequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) in the assessment order against those additions for concealing the particulars of income or furnishing

ITO 3(3), Mumbai vs. Sandeep Namdeo Chavan, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4566/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

subsequently assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act by the AO thereby making 100% addition on account of bogus purchases. 4. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and based on the submission of assessee, Ld. CIT(A)agreed with ... existent vendors by means of relevant supporting documents related to movement of goods, stock register, etc. to restrict the addition to 5% 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 28(1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Ganesh Engineering Workshop, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4548/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

subsequently assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act by the AO thereby making 100% addition on account of bogus purchases. 4. Aggrieved by the above order of AO, assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee ... shown onwards sales which has not been doubted by the AO. By relying on various case law, he reduced the disallowance @ 12.5% of bogus purchases and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Now before us, the revenue has preferred appeal by raising the grounds of appeal as under

Dinesh S Dhokar, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm& Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4546/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Dinesh S. Dhokar, Ito-19(1)(4), 2Nd Floor, Room No. 222, R. No. 6, Bldg No. 1, Matru Mandir, Tardeo बिधम/ Dadarkar Compound, Vaibhav, C-Wing, 1St Raod, Mumbai-400 007 Vs. Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaapd8605N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4545/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito-19(1)(4), Smt. Anita Dinesh 2Nd Floor, Room No. 222, Dhokar, Matru Mandir, Tardeo R. No. 6, Bldg No. 1, बिधम/ Raod, Mumbai-400 007 Dadarkar Compound, Vs. Vaibhav, C-Wing, 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aacpd9237E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, information was received from the sales tax Department that assessee has indulged in bogus purchases. On verification, the details of accommodation entries availed by the assessee is given below:- TIN Hawala Parties PAN F.Y. Amount in Rs. 27960603730V Prakash Steel ... factorize for profit element earned by assessee against possible purchase of material in the grey market and undue benefit of VAT against alleged bogus purchases, which lower authorities have rightly done. However, considering GP rate of 10.59% already reflected by the assessee as well as VAT rate applicable

M/S Dhanlaxmi Steel Distributors, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, the ground no. 1 raised by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4539/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, information was received from the sales tax Department that assessee is indulged in bogus purchases. On verification, the details of accommodation entries availed by the assessee is given below:- Hawala Parties Amount in Rs. Newzone Multi Trade ... factorize for profit element earned by assessee against possible purchase of material in the grey market and undue benefit of VAT against alleged bogus purchases, which lower authorities have rightly done. However, considering GP rate of 10.59% already reflected by the assessee as well as VAT rate applicable

ITO-9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Filtertechnics Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs ITA No. 2303/Mum/19 Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 2 of 3 39,59,200 on account of bogus purchases, and of Rs 16,964 on account of disallowance of interest for funds used for purchase of land. It was for this reason that ... case in the light of the applicable legal position. 5. We have noted that so far as the addition on account of bogus purchases is concerned, it stands reduced to Rs 4,94,900 anyway, and that too entirely on the estimated basis @ 12.5% being profits embedded in these bogus

ITO Ward 1(5), Thane West vs. Shri Hazaratali Mohd. Yadgar Shamani, Thane

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

against deletion of penalty by CIT(A) as imposed by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on the estimated income on bogus purchases. 3. First we would like to discuss the facts of the case in A.Y.2009-10. The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in Iron ... being non-genuine. The ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by partly sustaining the addition at 50% of the bogus purchases. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty Shri Hazratali Mohd. Yadgar Shamani imposed of Rs.30,145/- on the ground that no penalty is leviable

Mr. Vrajlal Manilal Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 27(3)(5), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalemr. Vrajlal Manilal Shah, Ito, Ward 27(3)(5) बनाम/ Cabin No. 402A, 4Th Flr, 37, Vadhani Industrial Vs. Estate, Lbs Road Opp Tower No.6, Vashi Rly Shreyas Cinema, Station. Navi Mumbai Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400086. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagps2788D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

making addition of Rs. 12,90,170/- u/s 69C of the Act to the income of the appellant on account of alleged unapproved bogus purchases. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any the above ground at the time of hearing. 2. The Brief ... Subsequently, the A.O has received information from DGIT, Mumbai and the Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra that the assessee has received accommodation of bogus purchases bills from the certain entities and dealers. Therefore A.O. issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, in response to the notice the assessee submitted that

ITO Ward 3(3), Kalyan vs. Majum Enterprises, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleito, Ward 3(3) Majum Enterprises बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion 5-A, Laxmi Niwas, Opp Vs. Murbad Road, Kalyan – Pandurang Vidyalaya 421301. Manpada Road, Dombivali (E) - 421201 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanfm6957F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

with a total income of Rs.4,60,000/-. Subsequently,the A.O received information from Sales Tax Department of Maharashtra that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from M/s Rema Trading Co. of Rs. 19,919/-. Therefore, the A.O. has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment ... respect of genuineness of the purchases and the explanations of Manjum Enterprises, Mumbai the assessee are not satisfactory. Therefore, the A.O made addition of bogus purchases and assessed the total income of Rs. 4,79,920/- and passed the order u/sec143 r.w.s.147 of the Act dated 12-12-2014. Subsequently

ITO 26(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mohd Talib Mahboob Ghonia, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 26(2)(3), Shri Mohd Talib Mahboob 3Rd Floor, Ghonia, Room No.317, 1 Roop Darshan Niwas, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Opp. Kaji Chawl, Bandra Kurla Complex, Kajupada, Bandra (East), Kurla West, Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai 400 070 Pan: Admpg 1858P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vishesh Srivastav, A.R. Revenue By : Shri S.V. Nair, Sr. A.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2021 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 31.12.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue Is Against The Part Deletion Of Addition By Ld. Cit(A) To The Tune Of 87.5% Of The Total Bogus Purchases As Against 100% Addition Made By The Ao Towards Bogus Purchases.

issue raised by the Revenue is against the part deletion of addition by Ld. CIT(A) to the tune of 87.5% of the total bogus purchases as against 100% addition made by the AO towards bogus purchases. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return ... prove the genuineness of the purchases. The assessee did not respond to the communication from the AO and finally the AO added the entire bogus purchases of Rs.95,70,489/-in the ex- party assessment order passed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act vide order dated

DCIT Circle-3, Thane vs. Shri. Vilas Anant Shimpi, Thane

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwaldcit, Circle-3, Shri Vilas Anant Shimpi, Room No.02, 6Th Floor, Gr./1St Floor, Moreshwar Aashar It Park, B-Wing, Kamal Building,, Dr. Ramesh Wagle Industrial Estate, Pradhan Marg, Talaopali, Vs. Road No. 16Z, Thane (W)-400602. Thane (W)-400604. Pan: Aajps0512L Appellant Respondent : Shri M. S. Samantha M. ( Sr. Dr) Appellant By Revenue By : None Date Of Hearing : 15.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2021 Order

Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty by not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the alleged bogus purchases from the Hawala parties during the course of assessment as well as penalty proceedings. 2. On the facts & in the circumstances of the case ... received information from Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that the assessee has received ITA No. 1264 Mum 2019-Shri Vilas Anant Shimpi a bogus purchase bill from Shakti Trading Company amounting to Rs. 8,77,500/-, which is bogus and the Assessing Officer added the entire amount under section

DCIT- 19 (1), Mumbai vs. Diamour, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Diamour Income Tax-19(1) 214, Panchratna Room No.203, 2Nd Floor M.P. Marg Matru Mandir Mumbai – 400 002 Tardeo Road Mumbai – 400 007 Pan/Gir No.Aadfd2155J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue By Shri Sajit V Nair Assessee By None Date Of Hearing 18/01/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 22/01/2021

only issue raised by the Revenue is qua the deletion of addition by ld.CIT(A) to the extent of 97% of the bogus purchase as against the 100% made by the AO. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 10/07/2010 declaring ... ground that carot, size and colour are not mentioned in the purchase and sale bills and accordingly, added the entire amount of bogus purchases to the income of the assessee by framing assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 29/12/2017. 4. In the appellate proceedings

Netel (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Thane

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manoj Kr. Aggarwal

order dated 21.08.2019 for A.Y. 2009-10, wherein the Tribunal has restored back the matter to the file of Assessing Officer in regard to bogus purchases by observing in para- 5 as under: 5. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee filed copy of consumption register ... assessee stated once the Tribunal has set-aside the quantum orders of Assessing Officer making addition and CIT(A) confirming the addition of bogus purchases, the penalty levied by Assessing ITA No. 7319& 7320 Mum 2017-Netel (India) Limited. Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) will not survive. Hence

Nayan Shukla, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

only common issue in these two appeals of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) restricting the disallowance of bogus purchases at 12.5% being profit earned by assessee on unexplained/unverified purchases and added the ITA No. 1629 & 1630 Mum 2017-Shri Nayan Shukla same as unexplained expenditure under section ... case are that the Assessing Officer received information from Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra that the assessee is beneficiary of receiving bogus purchase bills from following parties: ITA No. 1629 & 1630 Mum 2017-Shri Nayan Shukla 1. Amar Enterprises. Rs. 13,34,257/- 2. Sunrise Enterprises