“bogus purchases”

Ashwin Chimanlal Domadia, Mumbai vs. ITO 32(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: The Assessing Officer. Sales In This Case Were Not Doubted. The Assessing Officer Did Not Even Issue Any Notice To The Alleged Bogus Suppliers. The Income Tax Officer In This Case Has Made 12.5% Addition On Account Of Bogus Purchase Resulting In Disallowance Of Rs. 6,13,451/-.

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 24.1.2019 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged ... trading of goods. The Assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the sales tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However the suppliers were not produced before the assessing officer. Sales

Vaghasiya Exports, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-32, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Vaghasiya Exports, Pr. Cit-32, C-11, Bharat Diamond Bourse, 2Nd Floor, Ae-2080, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Bandra Kurla Compex, Bandra Kurla Compex, Bandra (E), Bandra East, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaafv 2061Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Shivram, A.R. & Shri Rahul Hakani, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2018 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [Hereinafter Referred To As The Pcit Relevant To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “Order Passed U/S. 263 Is Bad-In-Law & Liable To Be Quashed 1. The Ld. Pr. Cit Erred In Issuing Notice U/S.263 Of The Act Based Upon The Proposal Received From Ito / Jt. Cit & Not By Suo-Moto Examination Of Records & Application Of Mind & Thus, The Revision Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Act Are Carried Out Upon The Directions Of Ito / Jt. Cit Is Contrary To The Provisions Of Sec. 263 Of The Act & Hence, Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed.

thereafter the assessment was reopened u/s. 148 of the Act based upon the information received and reasons recorded regarding alleged bogus purchases made from certain concerns operated by one Shri Bhanwarlal Jain and all the related details were called for, enquiries were made by the AO and after verifying ... companies. 3. Perusal of records shows that, during the year, the AO has wrongly made an addition on adhoc basis @ 1.5% of the bogus purchases without any justification or reason stated in the order. Hence this assessment was erroneously completed under 143(3) ) r.w.s

Vaishali P Kadhi, Mumbai vs. ITO 27 (3)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeals by revenue stand dismissed and appeals by assessee are partly allowed

wherein the grievance is that the learned CIT-A has erred in sustaining 12.5 percent disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide respective orders for the concerned assessment years as under ... supply of building material. The Assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the sales tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However the suppliers were not produced before the assessing officer

ITO-17(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Mr. Abhay Kantilal Shah, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12

Abhay K.Shah & Co. The Assessing Officer (AO) received information from the Director General of Income Tax (Inv.), Mumbai that the assessee had made bogus purchases from the following hawala parties during the FY 2010-11 relevant to the AY 2011-12 Sr.No. Name of the Hawala Amount (Rs.) Parties

Rajiv I. Gandhi, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: The Assessing Officer. Sales In This Case Were Not Doubted. The Income Tax Officer In This Case Has Made 100% Addition On Account Of Bogus Purchase Resulting In Disallowance Of Rs. 1,28,65,146/- For A.Y. 2009-10 & Rs. 2,15,12,975/- For A.Y. 2010-11. 3. Upon Assessee’S Appeal Learned Cit(A) Restricted The Same To 12.5%

appeals by the assessee against respective orders of learned CIT(A) for concerned assessment year, wherein learned CIT(A) has sustained 12.5% disallowance for bogus purchases as under :- A.Y. 2009-10 Rs. 16,08,143/- A.Y. 2010-11 Rs. 26,89,122/- 2. Brief facts of the case are that ... reseller in Pharmaceuticals. The Assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the sales tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However the suppliers were not produced before the assessing officer. Sales

M/S Vajra Tools, Mumbai vs. ITO 27 (3)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaita Nos.1636, 1637 & 1638/Mum/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

appeals by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide orders for concerned assessment years as under: Assessment Year Disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchase ... Industrial Diamond Drill Bits. The assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the Sales Tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted, the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However, the suppliers were not produced before the Assessing Officer

Vajra Tools, Mumbai vs. ITO, 27(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaita Nos.1636, 1637 & 1638/Mum/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

appeals by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide orders for concerned assessment years as under: Assessment Year Disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchase ... Industrial Diamond Drill Bits. The assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the Sales Tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted, the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However, the suppliers were not produced before the Assessing Officer

ITO 20(3)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sumangal Artech, Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaassessment Year: 2010-11. The Income-Tax Officer, M/S. Sumangal Artech 20(3)(4), Mumbai. Vs. 172, Mmgs Building Mmgs Marg, Mumbai-400 014. Appellant. Respondent.

YAHYA, A.M. This is an appeal by the revenue wherein the revenue is aggrieved that the Ld. CIT-A has reduced the addition for bogus purchase of Rs 2,11,406/- done @ 100% by AO by sustaining only 12.5% at Rs. 26,426/- by order dated 06.03.2019 pertaining ... assessment was reopened upon information from sales tax department that assessee has made purchases from bogus dealers, the AO made 100% addition of the bogus purchase. 2 M/s. Sumangal Artech 4. Up on assessee's appeal Ld. CIT-A has noted that the sales or other workings have been doubted

M/S Vitrag Stell, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 18(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyam/S. Vitrag Steel Income Tax Officer-18(3)(5) Flat No. 207, 4Th Floor Matruminder Swamy Narayan Bldg Vs. Mumbai 3Rd Bhoiwada Mumbai 400002 Pan – Aagfv2087G Appellant Respondent

erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and that the same time sustaining 25% percent disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 20.12.2018 as against 12.5% done by the Assessing Officer pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. 3. Brief facts of the case are that ... business of Steele trading. The assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the Sales Tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However the suppliers were not produced before the Assessing Officer

M/S Vajra Tools, Mumbai vs. ITO 27 (3)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaita Nos.1636, 1637 & 1638/Mum/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

appeals by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide orders for concerned assessment years as under: Assessment Year Disallowance on account of alleged bogus purchase ... Industrial Diamond Drill Bits. The assessment in this case was reopened upon receipt of information from the Sales Tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessee submitted, the purchase vouchers and the payments were made through banking channel. However, the suppliers were not produced before the Assessing Officer

ACIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Ehara Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआअसं. 3295/मुं/2019 ("न. व.2011-12) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax 12(2)(1), Room No.128E, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Ehara Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Gala No.3 & 7, Sant Bhawan, Sharma Industrial Estate, Walbhat Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai 400 063 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Pan: Aaace2667E

submitted that the Assessing Officer had made addition vide assessment order dated 28/07/2016 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on account of bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer made addition to the extent of 12.5% of the total bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, on the addition made initiated ... Representative and have examined the documents available on record. A perusal of the penalty order dated 30/01/2017 reveal that the addition in respect of bogus purchases was made on mere estimations. The CIT(A) has deleted the penalty by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High

Abhijeet Dies & Tools Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 12(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Abhijeet Dies & Tools Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit – 12(1)(1), 38-C, Government Industrial Room No. 223, 2Nd Floor, Estate, Charkop, Kandivali West, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400067 Vs. Churchgate, Pan: Aaaca4238M Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Michael Jerald (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/09/2020

Abhijeet Plastic India Pvt. Ltd. is also engaged in the business of manufacturing moulds and dies. The AO made 100% addition of the alleged bogus purchases. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition. In the further appeal, the ITAT set aside the order passed ... other hand, in the cases relied upon by the Ld. DR the Hon’ble High court has held that in the cases of bogus purchases not the entire amount of bogus purchases but only profit embedded in such transaction should be added to the total income of the assessee. Since

Balaji Telefilms Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3)(Cr)4, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

return of income, the assessee declared additional income of Rs.2.79 Crores (Rs.117.53 Crores – Rs.114.74 Crores) as disclosed during search operations on account of alleged bogus purchases & bogus payments amounting to Rs.2.68 Crores & Rs.0.11 Crores respectively. It is evident from perusal of quantum assessment order that the said returned income ... been accepted by the revenue without making any further additions. 2.6 The bogus purchases were stated to be made by the assessee from various concerns controlled, operated and managed by one Shri Jagdish Mundra, an alleged entry provider. The statement of Shri Jagdish Mundra and his accountant was recorded

Balaji Telefilms Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3) Cen RG 4, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

return of income, the assessee declared additional income of Rs.2.79 Crores (Rs.117.53 Crores – Rs.114.74 Crores) as disclosed during search operations on account of alleged bogus purchases & bogus payments amounting to Rs.2.68 Crores & Rs.0.11 Crores respectively. It is evident from perusal of quantum assessment order that the said returned income ... been accepted by the revenue without making any further additions. 2.6 The bogus purchases were stated to be made by the assessee from various concerns controlled, operated and managed by one Shri Jagdish Mundra, an alleged entry provider. The statement of Shri Jagdish Mundra and his accountant was recorded

ITO-14(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Oriole Electronics Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the entire amount was liable to be added back to the total income

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Objections C.O.No277/Mum/2019.The Assessee has raised the following grounds of Objections. “1. A.O had made addition to the extent of 100% of the value of bogus purchases of Rs. 1,49,203/- and the CIT(A) has reduced addition to 28% of the value of alleged bogus purchase. However, considering ... compliance the LdA.R of the assessee appeared from time to time and the case was discussed. The A.O found that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills amounting to Rs. 1.49.203/-.The A.O to verity and examine the genuineness of the purchase transactions has issued notice

Balaji Telefilms Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3)(Cr)4, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

return of income, the assessee declared additional income of Rs.2.79 Crores (Rs.117.53 Crores – Rs.114.74 Crores) as disclosed during search operations on account of alleged bogus purchases & bogus payments amounting to Rs.2.68 Crores & Rs.0.11 Crores respectively. It is evident from perusal of quantum assessment order that the said returned income ... been accepted by the revenue without making any further additions. 2.6 The bogus purchases were stated to be made by the assessee from various concerns controlled, operated and managed by one Shri Jagdish Mundra, an alleged entry provider. The statement of Shri Jagdish Mundra and his accountant was recorded

M/S Shradha Apparels Wordwide, Mumbai vs. ACIT 21(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy

assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. The common issue involved in all the three appeals is addition on account of bogus purchases. 2 ITA NO .3255 to 3257/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2009-10 to 2011-12) 2. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing and export of readymade garments. During the impugned ... assessment years the Assessing Officer made addition holding that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from Hawala Dealers declared by the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. The Assessing Officer made addition of the entire alleged bogus purchases in the three assessment years as under:- Assessment year Bogus purchase

M/S Shradha Apparels Wordwide, Mumbai vs. ACIT 21(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy

assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. The common issue involved in all the three appeals is addition on account of bogus purchases. 2 ITA NO .3255 to 3257/MUM/2019 (A.Y.2009-10 to 2011-12) 2. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing and export of readymade garments. During the impugned ... assessment years the Assessing Officer made addition holding that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from Hawala Dealers declared by the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. The Assessing Officer made addition of the entire alleged bogus purchases in the three assessment years as under:- Assessment year Bogus purchase