“bogus purchases”

ACIT - Circle- 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Colo Color Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Bleacit – Circle – 6(2)(1) V. M/S. Colo Color Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 504, 5Th Floor 1St Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dadar Departmental Stores Mumbai – 400 020 M.C. Jawle Marg, Dadar(W) Mumbai – 400 028 Pan: Aabcc3349L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dinkle Hariya Department By : Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora

that the AO has made an addition of Rs.45,76,587/- being 5% on total purchases on estimated basis in order to bring the bogus purchases to tax on the basis of information received from the third party i.e. State Sales Tax Department and DDIT(Inv) V(I), Mumbai which ... income. We find from the record that the additions as made by the AO was a pure estimate and nothing concrete as to bogus purchases were brought on records by the AO by making any further enquiries or investigation. In our view the penalty cannot be imposed where the additions

Shri. Sarfaraz Ismail Shaikh, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28 (3)(1), Navi Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ramlal Negiआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6625/Mum/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10)

appeal by the assessee where the assessee is aggrieved that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred to sustain part disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 21.08.2019, pertaining to A.Y 2009- 10. Being ... building material supplier. 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 AO. Sales

ITO, 28(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Arfat Steel Metal Industries, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer – 28(1)(2), M/S Arfat Steel Metal Industries, Room No. 328 3Rd Floor, Tower Plot No. 30, Pawane Village, No. 6, Vashi Railway Station Navi Mumbai Complex, Vashi, Vs. Pan: Aajfa3696D Navi Mumbai - 400703 (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Michael Jerald (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Dharan Gandhi (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 23/07/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2020

assessee u/s 69C of the Act. In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT (A) restricted the addition to 12.5% of the total amount of bogus purchases determined by AO. Against the said findings, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. The revenue has challenged the order ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in directing the A.O. to restrict the disallowance of bogus purchases to 12.5% of total bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 1,84,20,250/- as against addition on peak credit basis amounting

Income Tax Officer Ward 28(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Sureshkumar N. Kadri, Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am आमकयअऩीरसिं./ Ita No. 3236/Mum/2019 (ननधाायणवषा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Income-Tax Officer Shri Sureshkumar Kadri Ward 28(3)(3), Room No.319, 3 Rd W-96-C, Midc Industrial Floor, 6Th Tower, Vashi Railway फनाभ/ Area, Rabale, Station Complex, Vashi, Navi Navi Mumbai-400 701 Vs. Mumbai-400 703 (अऩीराथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामीरेखासिं./Pan No. Anbpk 8662J अऩीराथी की ओय से/Appellant By : Shri Bhoopati, Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Bhadnesh Doshi, Ar सुनवाईकीतायीख/ Date Of Hearing: 27.07.2020 घोषणाकीतायीख/ Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2020

revenue is against the order of CIT(A) restricting the addition made by Assessing Officer by applying the profit rate at 12.5% of the bogus purchase. For this, Revenue has raised following ground: - “(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... erred in directing the A.O. to restrict the addition of bogus purchases to 12.5% as against addition of 100% made by the Assessing Officer on account bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that parties from whom these purchases were made proven accommodation entry providers, as concluded by Sales Tax Authorities

ACIT 27 (2), Mumbai vs. Shri. Pradhyumn Prataparai Thakkar, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1489/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

erred in deleting the addition of Rs 1,07,732/ - made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has failed to produce bills, vouchers and other 4 I.T.A. No 1489/Mum/2019 Shri Pradhyumn Prataprai Thakkar documentary evidences in support of its claim ... case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in estimating the profit from Hawala purchases by disallowing only Rs. 15,390/ -, being 12.5% of the bogus purchases as even the basic onus of producing transport details, delivery challans etc. were not fulfilled by the assessee." 3. The appellant prays that the order

ITO Ward 1(4), Kalyan vs. M/S Sumangala Machineries, Kalyan

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shris. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1300 & 1301/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11)

Sumangala Machineries, 5. The brief facts of the case are that AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of bogus purchases made by the assessee. On appeal before Ld. CIT(A), Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty by considering that the levy of penalties ... Sumangala Machineries, assessee has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. However, the estimation of disallowance on bogus purchases by the AO cannot be termed as either concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 9. We find support from the series of decisions

ITO Ward 3 (2), Thane vs. M/S Plus Suppliers, Thane

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1261/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

15/1/2014 by assessing the total income of Rs 11,10,992/-, after making the disallowances of Rs 9,93,815/-, on account of bogus purchases. The AO also initiated the penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied the penalty. 3. Aggrieved by the above 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

Viiking Technology and Trade Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Viiking Technology & Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Trade Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle- 604-605, 6Th Floor, 2(1), Mumbai Gateway Plaza, Hiranandani Garden, Powai, Mumbai – 400 076 Pan/Gir No.Aaacj9535E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

reference to the relevant pages of the paper book filed before us through e-mail. We hold that this is not the case of bogus purchases pursuant to the suppliers name being reflected as tainted dealer in the Sales Tax Department website of Government of Maharashtra. We find that

Income Tax Officer-21(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Natwar B Waghela, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Kavita P. Kaushik, representing the Department submitted that the Assessing Officer reopened assessment for assessment year 2009-10, as the assessee had indulged in bogus purchase of machinery from declared hawala dealers. During the course of reassessment proceedings, notices under section 133(6) of the Act were issued ... machine. The ld. Departmental Representative prayed for reversing the finding of CIT(A) and restoring the addition/disallowance made by Assessing Officer in respect of bogus purchase. 4. Per contra, Shri Nimesh Chotnani, appearing on behalf of the assessee vehemently defended the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Jeevandeep Prakashan Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri M. Balaganeshacit Circle 6(3)(2), M/S Jeevandeep Prakashan Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd., M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Vs. Plot No. 7, Industrial Estate, Off Ba Road, Opposite Lalbaug, Mumbai-400012, Pan: Aabcj0182E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Miss Samatha ( Sr. Dr) Assessee By : Shri Prashant Shah (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.07.2020 Orderunder Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals (Ld. Cit(A)-12, Mumbai Dated 14.01.2019 For Assessment Year 2020-11. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Publication Of Educational Books, Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2020-11 Declaring Income Of Rs. 1.60 Crore. The Return Of Income Was Selected For Scrutiny & Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) On 14.03.2013 Accepting The Return Income. Subsequently, Case Was Reopened Under Section 147. The Assessing Officer Reopened The Case On The Basis Of Information Received From The Dgit (Inv.), Mumbai

however, in our view the sole and substantial ground of appeal is that “if the ld CIT(A) erred in restricting the disallowance of bogus purchases to the extent of 12.5%”. 4. We have heard the submissions of the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue s and the learned ... documentary evidences furnished by assessee. We have further noted that the assessee has shown return income of Rs. 1.60 crore. The alleged bogus purchases is only to the extent of Rs. 4,00,000/- only. The assessee has categorically stated that the purchases were made in the form of Diary

Shri Pravin C. Bokadia, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain (Vp) & Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This is an appeal by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved by the addition of account of bogus purchase. The assessee further agitates that the learned CIT-A has erred in enhancing the disallowance on account of bogus purchases to 100% as against 12.5% disallowance done ... trading in steel. 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

ITO 27 (2)(3), Mumbai vs. Shri. Laxmichand A Dabhi, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1257/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

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. The Assessment was accordingly reopened. The assessing officer in this case has made addition @ 100% on account of bogus purchases. 3. Aggrieved by the above ... 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. 3 I.T.A. No. 1257/Mum/2019 Shri Laxmichand A. Dabhi 4. Now before us, the revenue has preferred appeal

Mr. Hanuman Dhanania, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 17 (1)(5), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1255/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 has indulged in bogus purchases. The Assessment was accordingly reopened. The assessing officer in this case has made addition @ 25% on account of bogus purchase amounting to Rs.12 ... sustained the addition made by the AO on estimating @ 12.5% of the alleged 3 I.T.A. No. 1255/Mum/2019 Mr. Hanuman D. Dhanania, bogus purchases overlooking that assessee has already declared GP ratio. Accordingly, he submitted that 12.5% estimated by Ld. CIT(A) is too high and he relied upon the various

M/S Ubiquitous Signs Pvt Ltd, Palghar vs. ITO, 15(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 297/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Ubiquitous Signs Pvt. Ito -15(3)(4), 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. M. K. Road, Plot No. 1, Survey No. 70- Mumbai-400 020. B, Bldg. No. 2, Opp- बिधम/ Ipol, Next To Anand Mangal Industrial Estate, Vs. Waliv Phata, Sativali Road, Vasai East, Distt- Palghar, Mahrashtra, Pin-401208 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aaacu6857C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : None By प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Ms. Bharti Singh, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 05.03.2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 15.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 24 In 2

shifted the office to new address. 6. On merit, we notice that AO in this case has made 100% disallowance on account of bogus purchases and further on appeal, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as assessee had not appeared for hearing from 24.10.16 to 19.07.17. During that