“bogus purchases”

ACIT- 18(1), Mumbai vs. Bhairav Metals, Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

this appeal of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) restricting the addition in estimating the profit rate at 12.5% of the bogus purchases instead of disallowed by the AO the entire bogus purchases. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is importers & suppliers of Ferrous ... returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal 3 before CIT(A), who restricted the addition at 12.5% of the bogus purchase made by the AO by observing in para 3.3.6 by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs. Smith

Shri Riteshkumar K. Bafna, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 20(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2321/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Shri Riteshkumar K. Bafna Income Tax Officer Pratiksha Tower, Flat No. Ward 20(3)(1) Vs. 102, B-Wing R. S. Nimkar Piramal Chambers Parel, Marg Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aabpb7160M

assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in estimating the profit rate at 12.5% of the bogus purchases. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is engaged in the business of ferrous and non-ferrous metals. The AO received information from DGIT ... could be adopted. Given the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I find it reasonable to estimate the gross profit on the alleged bogus purchases at 12.5%. Considering the facts of the case and submission made, I do not find any infirmity in the action

B. Vijaykumar & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri M Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 2833/Mum/2017 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2007-08)

order of CIT(A) directing the AO to restrict the addition made by AO being estimating profit percentage at the rate of 8 % on bogus purchases. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee engaged in the business of Manufacturing and exporters of Jewellery. The AO received information from DGIT ... works out to ₹ 1,23,71,440/-. I would like to clarify that the above principle to apply profit rate in respect of bogus purchases where quantitative details are available has been upheld by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Simit P. Sheth in which

Kiran V. Dhaka, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeal is partly allowed

Bench: 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 18.5.2018 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee in this case is engaged ... trading in 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

M/S. Premsons Bazaar, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

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, for A.Y. 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of garment trading. Information ... received from the sales tax Department that assessee has made bogus purchases. The assessment was accordingly reopened. The Assessing Officer in this case has made 100% addition on account of bogus purchases as under :- A.Y. 2010-11 Rs. 1,96,016/- A.Y. 2011-12 Rs. 22,061/- 3. Upon assessee

Shri Dhanpat Rajmal Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has erred in sustaining Rs. 10,13,400/- disallowance on account of bogus purchases, vide order dated 25.4.2018 pertaining to assessment year 2011-12. 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

Haresh Rasiklal Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 of the

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhharesh Rasiklal Shah Ito - 19(1)(5) Room No. 215, 2Nd Floor, 1/160 Mulji Niwas, Flat No.1, Opp: Madhav Baug Temple, Vs. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, C.P. Tank Road, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai-400004. Pan: Aajps7696B Appellant Respondent

assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee has received accommodation ITA No. 2256 Mum 2018-Haresh Rasiklal Shah. entries in the form of bogus purchases purchased from Kothari & Co. for Rs. 8,47,098/-. The Assessing Officer confronted this fact to the assessee. The assessee filed its reply

Income Tax Officer-11(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Western Imaginary Transcon Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kochar

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in restricting the disallowance on bogus purchases to 12.5% i.e. Rs.40,74,835/-thereby granting a relief of Rs. 92,54,561/- by ignoring the fact that neither the party ... latest decision of apex court in the case of N.K Proteins Ltd., Vs DCIT 2017(1) TMI 1090 – Supreme Court, in which 100% of bogus purchases are disallowed?”. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of execution of contracts for transportation

Shri Sohil P.Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

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

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 for A.Y. 20091-10 & 2010-11. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and export ... stainless steel hardware. 3. 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 100% addition on account of bogus purchase amounting

Income Tax Officer 19(3)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Super Tech Industries, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N K Protein Ltd, Dt. 16.01.2017, which is on the similar issue of bogus purchases and when the apex court order was already the law of the land when the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order on 16.03.2018." 3. "Whether ... 19/02/2016 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.105.34 Lacs after certain additions of Rs.105.05 Lacs on account of alleged bogus purchases as against returned income of Rs.0.28 Lacs filed by the assessee on 27/09/2011. 3 M/s. Super Tech Industries Assessment Year :2011-12 3.2 The reassessment proceedings

M/S.Krishna Mobile Accessories Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 12(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result assessee’s CO is partly allowed, rest of the appeals stand dismissed

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

assessee has not pressed the same, hence it is dismissed as not pressed. 4. The issue in dispute is disallowance on account of bogus purchase. 5. Brief facts of the case are that assessee in this case is engaged in the business of import and resale of mobile and mobile ... accessories. 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

ITO11(2)(1), Mumbai vs. S.K. Office Solutions Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6250/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer-11(2)(1) M/S. S.K. Office Solutions Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Flat No. 19, 3Rd Floor Room No.425, Aaykar Bhavan M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020. Lalita Society, Gokhale Road Vs. Vile Parle (East), Mumbai-400 049. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-1006-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Chaudhary Arun Kumar- Ld.Dr Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala-Ld. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ : 08/07/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09/08/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year [In Short Referred To As ‘Ay’] 2010-11 Contest The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai, [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No. Cit(A)-

133A on assessee on 23/11/2012. Another addition against which the penalty was levied was on account of estimated additions of Rs.15,735/- against alleged bogus purchases. The Ld. AO has already considered the effect of order of Ld. first appellate authority in quantum appeal while levying penalty against the assessee ... particulars of income and also on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The penalty proceedings on account of addition of alleged bogus purchases were initiated by observing as under: - Penalty Proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are separately initiated. 2.3 During penalty proceedings, show-cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s