“profit element”

Srikem Laboratories P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Srikem Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Acit-8(2) 311 Jogani Industrial Estate Mumbai. Vs. Chunabhatti Mumbai-400022 Pan No. Aadcs5022Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J. Ravindra, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/10/2017

purchases were not bogus but were made from parties other than those mentioned in the books of account, not entire purchase price but only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. That being the position, not the entire purchase price but only ... profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. The Hon’ble High Court referred to a similar view taken in the case of CIT vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and CIT vs. Bholanath Poly

ITO WD 29(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Navin J. Doshi, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

purchases were not bogus but were made from parties other than those mentioned in the books of account, not entire purchase price but only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. That being the position, not the entire purchase price but only ... profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. The Hon’ble High Court referred to a similar view taken in the case of CIT vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and CIT vs. Bholanath Poly

ITO 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Inmac Computers P.L Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

purchases were not bogus but were made from parties other than those mentioned in the books of account, not entire purchase price but only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. That being the position, not the entire purchase price but only ... profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. The Hon’ble High Court referred to a similar view taken in the case of CIT vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (Guj) and CIT vs. Bholanath Poly

Swatantrakumar G. Kapoor, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(3)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Swatantrakumar G. Kapoor Ito 26(3)(3), Gala N. 202, 2Nd Floor, Opp. Iit Mumbai. Main Gate, Powai, Vs. Mumbai-400076. Pan: Aaepk0784B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Kapoor. alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 51,40,437/-. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of AO that AO has added only profit element embedded in the bogus purchases. 7. We have noted that the AO has not made any independent enquiry. The AO has not rejected the books ... Profit for earlier and subsequent AYs. The ld. CIT(A) while confirming the order concluded that the AO has only added the profit element embedded in the bogus purchases. We have noted that the assessee has claimed Gross Profit of 27% during the year under consideration

Anand Fabricators P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am M/S.Anand Fabricators Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito 9 (1)(3), Mumbai B-4, Nandjyot Industrial Estate, Safed Pool, Andheri Kurla Road Sakinaka, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 72 Pan/Gir No. Aaaca1047Q Appellant) Respondent) ..

laws cited (supra), I estimate the suppressed profit to the extent of 12.5% of the purchases made from the bogus entities, as the suppressed profit element embedded in such purchases. This estimation is in addition to the GP shown by the appellant. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is partly allowed

Simplex Thermal Solution, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 29(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 6907/Mum/2016 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Simplex Thermal Solutions, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 206, Hallmark Commercial - Income Tax, Complex, Lbs Marg, Circle – 29(3), Mulund (West), Mumbai - Mumbai - 400080 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjfs0212J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) यनर्ावररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Navin Mishra (Ar) राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri V. Jenardhanan (Dr)

shown in books are. Therefore, the entire purchase from these parties cannot be added as bogus and what needs to be taxed is the profit element embedded in such transactions. Estimations ranging from 12.5% to 25% have been upheld by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, depending upon the nature ... Seth 356 ITR 451(Guj) upheld the decision of the Tribunal and sustained the addition 12.5% of the total bogus purchases holding that only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added to income of the assessee. Since, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) is in accordance with

Mithalal D Mutha, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 16(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as already a justified view has been taken by the Ld

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

sell the finished goods. In that view of the matter, as natural corollary, not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax. This was the view of this court in the case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries

Re3Ninsha Impex P.Ltd, Surat vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri R.C Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 4464/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year 2012-13) Renisha Impex P. Ltd., Ito, Ward 5(3)(1); Off. No. 304, Iii Floor, Mumbai. बिधम/ Vs. 6/2037 Papadwala Building, Mahindrapura; Surat – 395 003. स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aadcb1980G (अऩीराथी/Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

making the purchases from the open/grey market. The CIT(A) applying the methodology which was adopted by the High Court for estimating the profit element in respect of the bogus 7 Renisha Impex P. Ltd. Vs. ITO – ITA No. 4464/Mum/2016 ITO Vs. Renisha Impex P. Ltd – ITA No. 4453/Mum/2016 Assessment ... market, but are unable to persuade ourselves to be in agreement with the basis that had been adopted by him for quantification of the profit element involved in making of the bogus purchases. We find that the CIT(A) had referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court

ITO 20(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Lifetchniques, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G. Manjunatha, Am The Income Tax Officer Liftechniques Ward 20(2)(4), Room No.212, Minerva Industrial Estate Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Opp. Acme Indl. Estae, Vs. Mumbai-400 012 Bunder Road, Sewri (East), Mumbai-400 015 Appellant Respondent .. Pan No.Aaafl8801C

explain the purchases. Therefore the entire purchase from these 7 parties cannot be added as bogus and what needs to be taxed is the profit element embedded in such transaction. I therefore hold that it would be fair to the appellant that the disallowance on the issue of bogus purchase

Rakeshkumar S. Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 13(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, for statistical

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

made towards bogus purchases on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing. Under these facts, what needs to be taxed is only the profit element embedded in such purchases. Various Courts and Tribunals, in case of bogus purchases have taken a consistent view that only the profit element embedded

Hightech Engineers, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

from those parties are explained to the satisfaction of the AO. Under these facts and circumstances what needs to be taxed is only the profit element in such purchases but not the total purchases made from alleged bogus parties. This view has been further supported by the decision of Ahmedabad ... Tribunal in the case of Vijay Protiens Ltd (supra) wherein it was held that only profit element embedded in bogus purchases needs to be taxed. We further notice that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bholanath Poly Fab Pvt Ltd 355 ITR 290 (Guj) observed that

Shalimar Wire Agency, Mumbai vs. DCIT C.C. -13 (Erstwhile) DCIT C.C. 2(3) (Present), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

sold the finished goods as a natural corollary not the entire amount covered under such purchases would be subject to tax but only the profit element embedded therein. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Simit P. Seth ... Polyfab Pvt. Ltd (supra), We direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance to 12.5% of the purchases treated as non-genuine by estimating profit element in such bogus purchases. 9. In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on the 27th

Roha Dyechem P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 43, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Roha Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Central Circle-43 Plot-A-44/45, Road No.2, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Midc, Andheri(E), Mumbai400020. Mumbai-400092

Roha Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. 4 charged ranges between 2 and 2.5 per cent of the portfolio value which would be inclusive of a profit element for the portfolio manager. While the fixed administrative expenses were excluded on the ground that in the case of a large corporate taxpayer they would

Manoj Ishwar Choudhary, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 24, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

assessment order to the effect that purchases from M/s Vijay Sagar Trading Pvt Ltd is bogus in nature, however, made additions only to the profit element embedded in the purchases without conducting enquiry with regard to credits outstanding in the parties’ account. The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax further observed

Vinod H. Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(2)(Old), Mumbai

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 125 To 127/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year‟S: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Vinod H. Sanghvi, Dcit-15(2) (Old), 297, Tardeo, 1St Floor, Willie Acit 19(3) (Present) बिधम/ Vs. Mansion; Opp. Bank Of India 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Mumbai- 400 007 Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Afmps3101F (अऩीराथी/Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

from certain unidentified source, therefore, the addition in the hands of the assessee was liable to be restricted only to the extent of the profit element that would be involved in making of such purchases. The CIT(A) in support of his aforesaid conviction relied on the judgment ... backdrop of his aforesaid observations deliberated on the aspect of quantification of the estimated profit element in respect of the said bogus purchase transactions. The CIT(A) taking cognizance of the observations of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth

Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Vinod H. Sanghvi, Mumbai

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 125 To 127/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year‟S: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Vinod H. Sanghvi, Dcit-15(2) (Old), 297, Tardeo, 1St Floor, Willie Acit 19(3) (Present) बिधम/ Vs. Mansion; Opp. Bank Of India 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Mumbai- 400 007 Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 007 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Afmps3101F (अऩीराथी/Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

from certain unidentified source, therefore, the addition in the hands of the assessee was liable to be restricted only to the extent of the profit element that would be involved in making of such purchases. The CIT(A) in support of his aforesaid conviction relied on the judgment ... backdrop of his aforesaid observations deliberated on the aspect of quantification of the estimated profit element in respect of the said bogus purchase transactions. The CIT(A) taking cognizance of the observations of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Simit P. Sheth

Seco Warwick Allied P.Ltd, Thane vs. DCIT 10(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Assessee is set aside and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G. Manjunatha, Am Seco Warwick Allied Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd. Of Income Tax-10(2) 05Th Floor, Amfotech It Park, 05Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Wagle Estate, Midc, Thane Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, (West)-400 604 Mumbai-400 013 Appellant Respondent .. Pan No.Aaaca8938Q The Deputy Commissioner Seco Warwick Allied Pvt. Of Income Tax Ltd. Allied House, 1 St Road, Vs. 4Th 455, Floor, Aayakar Chembur Mubai-400 071 Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 Appellant .. Respondent

case and in law, the CIT(A) had erred in partly holding the addition made by the AO by stating that only the profit element embedded in the bogus purchases is to be taxed instead of whole transaction.” 7. At the outset, the learned Sr. DR drew our attention ... explain the purchases. Therefore, the entire purchase from these 3 parties cannot be added as bogus and what needs to be taxed is the profit element embedded in such transaction. Estimation of 25% has been upheld by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court depending upon the nature of the business

DCIT14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Seco Warwick Allied P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Assessee is set aside and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G. Manjunatha, Am Seco Warwick Allied Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Ltd. Of Income Tax-10(2) 05Th Floor, Amfotech It Park, 05Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Wagle Estate, Midc, Thane Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, (West)-400 604 Mumbai-400 013 Appellant Respondent .. Pan No.Aaaca8938Q The Deputy Commissioner Seco Warwick Allied Pvt. Of Income Tax Ltd. Allied House, 1 St Road, Vs. 4Th 455, Floor, Aayakar Chembur Mubai-400 071 Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 Appellant .. Respondent

case and in law, the CIT(A) had erred in partly holding the addition made by the AO by stating that only the profit element embedded in the bogus purchases is to be taxed instead of whole transaction.” 7. At the outset, the learned Sr. DR drew our attention ... explain the purchases. Therefore, the entire purchase from these 3 parties cannot be added as bogus and what needs to be taxed is the profit element embedded in such transaction. Estimation of 25% has been upheld by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court depending upon the nature of the business

Pentagon System and Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed where as appeal of assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Pentagon System & Vs. Dcit (Osd) Cir 2(3) R.No.552, 5Th Floor, Services Pvt. Ltd., Pramukh Plaza, Cardinal Gracia Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Opp. P & G Plaza, Chakala M.K. Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400099 Mumbai - 400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacp0547J Appellant) .. Respondent) Dcit (Cir 2(2)(2) Vs. M/S. Pentagon System & R.No.549, Aayakar Bhavan, Services Pvt. Ltd., M.K. Road, Pramukh Plaza, Cardinal Gracia Mumbai – 400020 Road, Opp. P & G Plaza, Chakala Andheri (E), Mumbai-400099 Pan/Gir No. Aaacp0547J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Accounts were not rejected. However, he has added the peak credit in respect of such purchases in assessee’s income. By observing that only profit element embedded in bogus purchase which the assessee would have made, should be added in the assessee’s income, the CIT(A) has restricted