← All Phrases

“bogus purchases”

DisallowancesSection 69CSection 69C9,532 judgments

The decision most relied on for bogus purchases is CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), cited in 1,465 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on bogus purchases

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

CIT v. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.
355 ITR 290 · 2013 · High Court
712
citing judgments

If an assessee makes purchases from bogus parties, but the underlying goods are genuinely acquired and sold, only the profit margin embedded in such purchases, and not the entire value of the bogus purchases, should be added to the assessee's income.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT
316 ITR 274 · 2009 · High Court
460
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
58 ITD 428 · 1996 · ITAT
430
citing judgments

Where purchases are found to be non-genuine or fictitious, a reasonable disallowance of 25% of such purchases or the peak credit, whichever is higher, can be made. This is applied to address unexplained expenditure under Section 69C when actual goods are likely procured from the grey market.

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt. ltd.
418 ITR 315 · 2019 · Supreme Court
408
citing judgments

Income tax additions cannot be sustained merely on the basis of uncorroborated statements or allegations. The Revenue must bring on record sufficient material and allow the assessee to produce evidence to prove such additions.

CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
372 ITR 619 · 2015 · High Court
391
citing judgments

Transactions defying human probability cannot be applied to isolated purchases if sales are accepted as genuine, and purchases cannot be disallowed without considering the entire transaction and documentary evidence. Failure to produce parties in an assessment proceeding may not be fatal to the assessee.

Nikunj Eximp Enterprises v. CIT
216 Taxmann 171 · 2013 · High Court
325
citing judgments

Purchases may be treated as genuine even if the purchase parties are untraceable or not available for verification, as long as there is no specific evidence from the parties themselves denying the transactions or proving them to be bogus.

CIT v. Shyam R. Pawar
54 Taxmann.com 108 · 2015 · High Court
279
citing judgments

Transactions involving the purchase and sale of shares cannot be considered bogus where the assessee provides documentary evidence, unless the revenue brings substantial evidence on record to reject such proof. This principle is consistently applied in cases concerning claims of bogus long-term capital gains arising from penny stock transactions.

Judgments citing bogus purchases

ITO 21 (3)(5), Mumbai vs. Vinit Pravin Sakaria, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5934/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yaya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Ito-21(3)(5), Shri Vinit Pravin Sakaria, Room No. 117, 2Nd Floor, Mahalaxmi Metal Industries, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, V/S 5/27, ‘D’ Wing, Ambedkar Nagar Mumbai-400012. Chs, Op. Worli Police Station, Worli, Mumbai-400 025 Pan : Besps6796E Appellant Respondednt

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding only 12.5% addition of Rs.15,25,661/- on the bogus purchases as against the AOs stand of disallowing 100% of the bogus purchases, ignoring the fact that the action of the Assessing Officer was only based ... appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the addition was restricted to the extent of 12.5% of such purchases being the profit on such bogus purchases. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the revenue has filed the present appeal before us. 6. None appeared on behalf of assessee despite

Income Tax Officer Ward 32(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Dharmesh D Modi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5836/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Ito Ward-32(1)(4), Shri Dharmesh D. Modi, C-11, 2Nd Floor, Room No. B-106, Shri Krupa Chs Ltd. 5Th Kasturba Road, Borivali 202, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, V/S Bkc, Bandra (East), (E), Mumbai-400066 Mumbai-400051 Pan : Aaepm0995L Appellant Respondednt

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Darshana D Modi revenue has raised identical grounds of appeal. Facts of all the appeals are identical except variation of figures of alleged bogus purchases. Thus, all appeals were clubbed, heard and are decided by a common order. For appreciation of facts, the appeal for Assessment Year ... case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the addition to Rs.49,920/- (@ 5% of Rs.9,98,400/-) on account of bogus purchases, without appreciating that the fact that the assessee has not produced any cogent evidence to substantiate that he had taken actual delivery of goods

M/S.Sanjay Metal Corporation, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 19(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee's appeals are partly allowed

ITA 5297/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

orders of learned CIT(A) wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 12.5% disallowance on account of bogus purchases, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged ... ferrous metal. 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 Ward 28(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Firoz Moinuddin Shaikh, Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5295/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

department that assessee has made purchases from bogus dealers. The assessing officer in this case has made hundred percent addition on account of bogus purchase amounting to 3. Up on assessee's appeal learned CIT-A has noted that the sale has not been doubted. Accordingly placing reliance upon several ... case laws and up on the facts of the case he sustained 15% disallowance out of the bogus purchases. 4. Against above order revenue is in appeal before the ITAT. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. 5. We find that in this case the sales have

Shri Samir H Padia, Mumbai vs. ITO 30(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4909/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Ito 30(3)(2), C-13, , 6Th Shri Samir H Padia Vs 2A/83A, Sharda Estate Floor, Pratyaksh Kar Vazira Naka, L.T. Road, Bhawan , Road No. 610, Borivali (W), Bkc Bandra, (E), Mumbai-400 092 Mumbai -400051 Pan : Agppp8362F Appellant Respondednt

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 69C

such details. The AO, in absence of any explanation, treated the entire purchases as unexplained expenditure and made addition of 100% of the alleged bogus purchases. On appeal before CIT(A), the action of assessing officer was upheld. Further aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee has filed ... revenue, we are of the view that in order to fulfil the gap of revenue leakage, disallowance of a reasonable percentage of the alleged bogus purchases would 8 ITA 4909/Mum/2018 Samir H Padia meet the ends of justice. Therefore, in our view, if disallowance is restricted

DCIT, Central Circle- 19, New Delhi vs. Forum Sales Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are hereby

ITA 3247/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit Vs. Forum Sales Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-19, C-134, Defence Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan :Aaacf0285H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40A(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. B.R.R

DCIT, Central Circle- 19, New Delhi vs. Forum Sales Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are hereby

ITA 3246/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit Vs. Forum Sales Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-19, C-134, Defence Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan :Aaacf0285H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40A(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. B.R.R

ITO 28(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Anil Narayan Lokre (Prop. Anil Trading Co.), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6394/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6394/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer-28(1)(1) Anil Narayan Lokre Room No.329, 3Rd Floor D-3/13, Nilgiri Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. बनाम/ Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Plot No.282, Sector-23 Vs. Station Complex, Vashi Juinagar (W) Navi Mumbai-400 705. Navi Mumbai-400 706. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aappl-1426-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri R. Bhoopathi-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi-Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

Anil Narayan Lokre Assessment Year :2009-10 of appeal that the sole issue that arises for our consideration is addition on account of alleged bogus purchases. 2. None has appeared for assessee and no valid adjournment application is on record. Left with no option, the matter is proceeded with ... impugned AY u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 03/03/2015 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.7.55 Lacs after addition of alleged bogus purchases for Rs.2.00 Lacs as against returned income of Rs.4.90 Lacs filed by the assessee on 29/09/2009 which was processed u/s.143(1). 3.2 Pursuant

ITO 33(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Geeta Atul Kothari (L/H. Late Shri Atul Kothari), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6393/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer -33(1)(1) V. Smt Geeta Atul Kothari Room No. 705, 7Th Floor {L/H Late Shri Atul Kothari} C-12, Pratyakshakar Bhavan B-21, Sanjana Apartment Bandra Kurla Complex Borsa Pada, Sita Sadan Tower Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Off Sai Baba Nagar Road Kandivali (W), Mumbai – 400 067 Pan: Aabpk1074F (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Jadia

For Appellant: Shri Hemant JadiaFor Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 69C

issue in the case of Pr.CIT v Tejua Rohit kumar Kapadia in SLP No. 12670/2018. In this case the High Court held that the bogus purchases cannot be treated as bogus if they are duly supported by bills, all payments are made by account payee cheques and sales

ITO - 12 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Advance Emergency Systems Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6385/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6385/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer-12(1)(1) M/S. Advance Emergency Room No.226, 2Nd Floor Systems Private Limited बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan A-306, Virwani Industrial Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Off. Western Express Highway Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400 063. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagca-3741-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Ankush Agarwal-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri R. Bhoopathi-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ankush Agarwal-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi-Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

Emergency Systems P.Ltd. Assessment Year :2010-11 of appeal that the sole issue that arises for our consideration is addition on account of alleged bogus purchases. 2. We have carefully heard the rival submissions, perused relevant material on record and deliberated on arguments advanced before us. 3.1 Facts on record ... r.w.s. 147 on 29/02/2016 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.33.58 Lacs after sole addition of alleged bogus purchases for Rs.8.97 Lacs as against returned income of Rs.24.61 Lacs e-filed by the assessee on 21/09/2010 which was processed u/s.143(1). 3.2 Pursuant to receipt of certain

ITO - 27 (1)(4), Mumbai vs. Elite Electricals, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5626/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon’Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon’Bleincome Tax Officer– 27(1)(4) V. M/S. Elite Electricals Tower No. 6, 4Th Floor, Room No. 409 4, Ganga Annex, Nava Shrinagar Chs Vashi Rly. Station Complex P.L. Lokhande Marg, Chembur Vashi, Navi Mumbai Mumbai – 400 089

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap
Section 271(1)(c)

levied of Rs. 69,104/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the IT Act as the penalty was levied on quantum additions made on account of bogus purchases, without appreciating that the onus was on the assessee to establish the genuineness of such purchases by 2 M/s. Elite Electricals producing such parties ... levied penalty, only after verifying the fact that the assessee evaded the taxes on quantum of additions made on account of bogus purchases and the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of such purchases? 3) The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above grounds

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

In the result assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5156/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh (Jm) & Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

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 13.7.2018 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged ... ferrous metals. 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 -17(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Adarsh Aluminium Centre, Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5136/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh (Jm) & Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

appeal by the revenue wherein the revenue is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has sustained only 8% disallowance on account of bogus purchases vide order dated 1.6.2018 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 2. The assessee in this case is engaged into business of trading in aluminum utensils. The assessment ... sales tax department that assessee has made purchases from bogus dealers. The assessing officer in this case has made 12.5% addition on account of bogus purchase amounting to Rs. 1,00,986/-. 3. Upon assessee's appeal learned CIT-A has noted that the sales has not been doubted. Accordingly

ITO 17(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Chetan Bachubhai Doshi, Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5135/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh (Jm) & Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

wherein the Revenue is aggrieved that learned CIT(A) has sustained only 8% as against 12.5% disallowance by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 15.6.2018 pertaining to AY 2010-11. 2. The assessee in this case is engaged into business of traders in ball bearing ... sales tax department that assessee has made purchases from bogus dealers. The assessing officer in this case has made 12.5% addition on account of bogus purchase amounting to Rs. 10,77,771/-. 3. Upon assessee's appeal learned CIT-A has noted that the sale has not been doubted. Accordingly

Smt. Priti Jayesh Gandhi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-27(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5119/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Shamim Yahyasmt. Priti Jayesh Gandhi Income Tax Officer-27(2)(5) 10, Paras Darshan Room No. 421, 4Th Floor 5Th Floor, M.G. Road Vs. Tower No. 6, Vashi Rly. Stn. Ghatkopar (E) Navi Mumbai 400703 Mumbai 400077 Pan – Acgpg0790B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Ruchi RathodFor Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari

assessee is aggrieved that the Learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 12.5% percent disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 15.06.208. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged in the business of trading in chemicals and solvents. The Assessment ... 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 in this case were not doubted

Shri Maganlal M. Patel, Mumbai vs. The ITO 22(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5117/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Shamim Yahyashri Maganlal M. Patel Income Tax Officer-27(2)(5) 502, New Vishwajyoti Aptt. Room No. 421, 4Th Floor Balaji Lane, Tilak Road Vs. Tower No. 6, Vashi Rly. Stn. Ghatkopar (E) Navi Mumbai 400703 Mumbai 400077 Pan – Aabpp4490L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Ruchi RathodFor Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari

assessee is aggrieved that the Learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining 12.5% percent disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 14.06.208. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged in the business of trading in timber. 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 in this case were not doubted

M/S.Harsora Engineering Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4274/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

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 21.3.2018 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged ... trading and construction. 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

Chirag R. Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 31(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 792/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh (Jm) & Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

rejected the books of accounts of the assessee u/s 145(3) of the Act and calculated a g.p. of 8% on the bogus purchases of Rs.2,35,15,773/- and held that the resultant amount of Rs. 18,81,261/- as taxable profit element in the bogus purchases. 5. Against ... confirmed the validity of reopening of the case as well as action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of 8% of the bogus purchase. 6. As regards the reopening of the case, learned CIT(A) held that the arguments of the assessee are considered and it is held that

ACIT 13 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Royal Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6161/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathaacit-13(3)(1) Vs. Royal Plastic Industries Room No.229/219 Pvt.Ltd. 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhawan A-202 Tanishka M.K.Road Novelty Silk Mill Compound Mumbai-400 020 S.V.Road, Dahisar(E) Mumbai-400 068 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr3209B Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

income shall not be levied. In response, the assessee submitted that although, the Ld. AO has made additions towards 12.5% profit on alleged bogus purchases, but, fact remains that the assessee has filed complete details in order to prove genuineness of purchases. Therefore, merely for the reasons that there ... levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961, in respect of additions made towards 12.5% gross profit on alleged bogus purchases, on the ground that the assesse could not establish genuineness of purchases made from certain parties, in the backdrop of clear findings from the Sales Tax Department

Mahavir Metal, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle - 19 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse is partly allowed

ITA 6102/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathamahavir Metal Vs. Acit,Circle-19(3) 6Th Jaikunwar Bhavan Matrumandir, Tardeo Road Khetwadi, 8Th Lane Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 004 Pan/Gir No.Aaifs6733N Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147

Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 15,54,324/- on account of "Bogus Purchases". 2) The Learned CIT(A) has further erred in enhancing the addition made by the Assessing Officer from ... DGIT, investigation, Mumbai, as per which, Sales Tax Authorities of Government of Maharashtra had taken actions against number of Hawala dealers, who had issued bogus purchase bills to various parties. As per list of beneficiaries, the assessee is one of the beneficiary, who had taken accommodation bills of bogus purchases