“profit element”

ACIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Earth Neeprima Jv, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

assessee did produce cloth and sell finished goods, the entire amount covered under such purchase would not be subjected to tax and only the profit element embedded therein was to be taxed. While coming to the above conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court also relied on the decision ... engaged. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth (supra), I hold that the profit element embedded and suppressed in the alleged purchases were to the extent of 12.5%. Hence, addition to the extent of 12.5% is upheld and balance

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Earth Neeprima Jv, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

assessee did produce cloth and sell finished goods, the entire amount covered under such purchase would not be subjected to tax and only the profit element embedded therein was to be taxed. While coming to the above conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court also relied on the decision ... engaged. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth (supra), I hold that the profit element embedded and suppressed in the alleged purchases were to the extent of 12.5%. Hence, addition to the extent of 12.5% is upheld and balance

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Earth Neeprima Jv, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

assessee did produce cloth and sell finished goods, the entire amount covered under such purchase would not be subjected to tax and only the profit element embedded therein was to be taxed. While coming to the above conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court also relied on the decision ... engaged. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of CIT vs Simit P. Sheth (supra), I hold that the profit element embedded and suppressed in the alleged purchases were to the extent of 12.5%. Hence, addition to the extent of 12.5% is upheld and balance

Asst CIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. Shree Swastik Developers, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2559/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Assistant Commissioner Of Shree Swastik Developers Income Tax 25(2) Sai Shopping Room No. 108, 1St Floor, S.V. Road बनाम/ Building No. C-11, Borivali Station Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Borivali(W) Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400 092 Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aavfs-8876-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

sales were not in dispute and the addition, if any, which has to be made in all such cases is to account for profit element embedded in such purchase transactions. The case law relied upon by Ld. CIT(A) could not be applied to the instant case as the said

Asst CIT 21(3), Mumbai vs. Teknic Industries, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal as well as the cross objection are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

during the year under consideration. As the purchases invoices issued against the alleged bogus purchases are unverifiable, and part of the profit element on the purchases made from the above mentioned 14 parties is already included in the above gross profit rate shown for the year under consideration, it would

Topnotch Chemicals P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am M/S. Topnotch Chemicals Vs. Ito Wd 8(3)(2), Mumbai Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. C-116, Ttc Industrial Area, Thane- Belapur, Pawane Village, Navi Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aaact3865F Appellant) .. Respondent)

impugned order, CIT(A) confirmed the entire addition on account of bogus purchases by disregarding assessee’s plea to uphold only profit element involved in such purchases which was alleged to be avoided. 3 ITA Nos.6554/Mum/2016 to ITA No.6556/Mum/2016 M/s. Topnotech Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., & M/s. Mitool Equipments

Chhaganlal Solanki, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(1)(3) (Currently ITO WD. 22(1)(3)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoफनाभ/ Shri Chhaganlal Solanki, Ito-19(1)(3), 99/3, Dr. Mahimtura Marg, Mumbai. Vs. 3Rd Kumbharwada, Mumbai-004. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Anlps8277P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

lower percentage in their case, which is convincing and also based on the same logic adopted by the case law cited for estimating the profit element embedded on non- genuine purchases, the AO is directed to restrict the estimation @ 6.5% on the total non-genuine purchases

DCIT 13(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Royal Palms (India )P. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

full. Thus, relying upon the various judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Courts and few other courts, it was found by him that only profit element or the element of potential inflation could at the best be disallowed. Thus, some analyses were made by him and on the basis ... Simit P. Sheth2013) 219 Taxman 85 (Guj) has held that in such facts and circumstances, not entire purchase price but only profit element embedded in such purchases can be added. The finding of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Seth

ITO 20(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mohammedi Z. Kanchwala, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12

assessee. The Ld. A.R. fairly conceded that if it is treated as advance against the sales when the sales are affected only profit element can be added to the income of the assessee but not the entire advance of sales can be treated as income of the assessee

Mohammedi. Z Kanchwala, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 20(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12

assessee. The Ld. A.R. fairly conceded that if it is treated as advance against the sales when the sales are affected only profit element can be added to the income of the assessee but not the entire advance of sales can be treated as income of the assessee

ITO 32(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Pushpaben R.Shah, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

admittedly these are bogus purchases. But the only issue now is that once the sales are accepted made out of the same purchase only profit element can be added on account of savings of VAT, other taxes and purchases of material from grey market which is certainly at a lower

ITO 32(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Pushpaben R.Shah, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

admittedly these are bogus purchases. But the only issue now is that once the sales are accepted made out of the same purchase only profit element can be added on account of savings of VAT, other taxes and purchases of material from grey market which is certainly at a lower

Parth Tradelinks P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Parth Tradelinks P. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, B-1602 Kailash Tower, M.G. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Rd, Kandivali (W) Mumbai-20 Mumbai-400 0067 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaacp6609H Assessee By .. Shri Vipul J. Shah, Ar .. Shri Anupama Singla, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing .. 23-03-2017 .. Date Of Pronouncement 07-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

purchase are bogus from a Hawala Parties and was asked to produce these parties for verification, the assessee could not produce and admitted that profit element at the rate of 6% of the bogus purchases can be added as recorded by AO in Para 4.4 as under: - “4.4 – In response ... purchases. He has instead disallowed only 6% of the Page 3 of 4 Parth Tradelinks P. Ltd.; AY:09-10 purchases by considering the profit element embedded in the impugned sales. The appellant had accepted the disallowance in the assessment proceedings voluntarily. The purchases claimed from these two parties

ITO 18(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pravin U Parmar (Jain ), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri G S Pannu, Am & Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11 Pravin U Parmar (Jain) Ito 18(1)(2) M S Unique Indl Corp., Mumbai Vs. Flat No.10 Dsk Trilok Chs Ltd., 469 K W Chitle Marg, Dadar(W), Mumbai 400 028. Pan Aacpj8270B (Appellant) (Respondent)

declared by the assessee. The learned CIT(A) relying upon certain judicial precedents, observed that in such circumstances what can be added is the profit element embedded in such purchases treated as bogus. He noted that for the year under consideration, the assessee has shown gross profit rate ... purchases were actually made from the concerned parties. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, the CIT(A) was justified in holding that the profit element embedded in the purchases treated as bogus can be considered for addition. Having held so, it is necessary to decide what should be the gross

Pravin U Parmar (Jain), Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri G S Pannu, Am & Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11 Pravin U Parmar (Jain) Ito 18(1)(2) M S Unique Indl Corp., Mumbai Vs. Flat No.10 Dsk Trilok Chs Ltd., 469 K W Chitle Marg, Dadar(W), Mumbai 400 028. Pan Aacpj8270B (Appellant) (Respondent)

declared by the assessee. The learned CIT(A) relying upon certain judicial precedents, observed that in such circumstances what can be added is the profit element embedded in such purchases treated as bogus. He noted that for the year under consideration, the assessee has shown gross profit rate ... purchases were actually made from the concerned parties. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, the CIT(A) was justified in holding that the profit element embedded in the purchases treated as bogus can be considered for addition. Having held so, it is necessary to decide what should be the gross

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs. Acit – 2(2), Mumbai Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 2(2), Mumbai Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) Acit – 2(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) Dcit – 2(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Ahura Centre, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri – East Mumbai – 400 093 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl6442L Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Assessee By Shri Arvind Sonde Alongwith Shri Sampat Kabra Revenue By Smt. S.Padmaja

also to be borne by L&T Ltd [and now by the assessee]. On that only expenses are incurred and there would be no profit element. Then the issue arises of running the wagons onto those tracks. As per the agreement, the assessee was not permitted to run the wagon