M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income of Rs. 5,50,00,000 admitted in the statement is assessed as the income of the appellant and added to the income under the head "Income from Business". 7.2 The ld. D.R. submitted that the AO, in the aforesaid order, relevant portion of which has been reproduced above given sufficient reasons backed by judicial pronouncements as would justify

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income of Rs. 5,50,00,000 admitted in the statement is assessed as the income of the appellant and added to the income under the head "Income from Business". 7.2 The ld. D.R. submitted that the AO, in the aforesaid order, relevant portion of which has been reproduced above given sufficient reasons backed by judicial pronouncements as would justify

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income of Rs. 5,50,00,000 admitted in the statement is assessed as the income of the appellant and added to the income under the head "Income from Business". 7.2 The ld. D.R. submitted that the AO, in the aforesaid order, relevant portion of which has been reproduced above given sufficient reasons backed by judicial pronouncements as would justify

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income of Rs. 5,50,00,000 admitted in the statement is assessed as the income of the appellant and added to the income under the head "Income from Business". 7.2 The ld. D.R. submitted that the AO, in the aforesaid order, relevant portion of which has been reproduced above given sufficient reasons backed by judicial pronouncements as would justify

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income of Rs. 5,50,00,000 admitted in the statement is assessed as the income of the appellant and added to the income under the head "Income from Business". 7.2 The ld. D.R. submitted that the AO, in the aforesaid order, relevant portion of which has been reproduced above given sufficient reasons backed by judicial pronouncements as would justify

M/S. MUKKA PROTEINS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOW AS MUKKA SEA FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., ),MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

bogus purchases accounted by the assessee as\nfound by any of the lower authorities.”\n3.7 In the instant case though assessee had received the supplies\nfrom the persons in respect to whom additional income is offered, it\nhas admitted additional income to co-operate with the department.\nOnly where the parties have confirmed, the additional income is not\noffered

M/S. MUKKA PROTEINS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOW AS MUKKA SEA FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., ),MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

bogus purchases accounted by the assessee as\nfound by any of the lower authorities.”\n3.7 In the instant case though assessee had received the supplies\nfrom the persons in respect to whom additional income is offered, it\nhas admitted additional income to co-operate with the department.\nOnly where the parties have confirmed, the additional income is not\noffered

M/S. ETA STAR INFOPARK,BENGALURU vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

bogus share capital by the Companies through the device of money laundering and hence it is not applicable on the facts and circumstances of the present case and the same is distinguishable on facts. 2.27 It is submitted that it is a well settled principle that if the learned Assessing officer has taken one of the possible views

M/S. ETA STAR INFOPARK,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

bogus share capital by the Companies through the device of money laundering and hence it is not applicable on the facts and circumstances of the present case and the same is distinguishable on facts. 2.27 It is submitted that it is a well settled principle that if the learned Assessing officer has taken one of the possible views

M/S. HARIS MARINE PRODUCTS,MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are\nallowed

Income\nfrom Business\".\nAY 2017-18:\n7.12 The purchases as per books from the parties from whom bogus bills were

M/S. HARIS MARINE PRODUCTS,MANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are\nallowed

Income\nfrom Business\".\nAY 2017-18:\n7.12 The purchases as per books from the parties from whom bogus bills were

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

purchase of Rs.61.40 lakhs. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that though the purchases were not made from the parties from whom the assessee claimed, there was complete quantitative tally of the materials ITA Nos.131 to 134/Bang/2023, M/s. SPR Spirits Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 44 of 51 purchased and sold. He was of the view that such materials were purchased from

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

purchase of Rs.61.40 lakhs. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that though the purchases were not made from the parties from whom the assessee claimed, there was complete quantitative tally of the materials ITA Nos.131 to 134/Bang/2023, M/s. SPR Spirits Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 44 of 51 purchased and sold. He was of the view that such materials were purchased from

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

purchase of Rs.61.40 lakhs. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that though the purchases were not made from the parties from whom the assessee claimed, there was complete quantitative tally of the materials ITA Nos.131 to 134/Bang/2023, M/s. SPR Spirits Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 44 of 51 purchased and sold. He was of the view that such materials were purchased from

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

purchase of Rs.61.40 lakhs. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that though the purchases were not made from the parties from whom the assessee claimed, there was complete quantitative tally of the materials ITA Nos.131 to 134/Bang/2023, M/s. SPR Spirits Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 44 of 51 purchased and sold. He was of the view that such materials were purchased from

M/S ANANTHA REFINERY PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

income has been increased by 41 and 36 times and the disallowance of purchases at 37% and 35% respectively [Refer: Page 4 of the PB]. This analysis strengthens the assessee's argument that the purchases made by the assessee were genuine. In the given circumstances, an interpretation can be inferred that the purchases may be from the bogus parties; nevertheless

M/S ANANTHA REFINERY PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

income has been increased by 41 and 36 times and the disallowance of purchases at 37% and 35% respectively [Refer: Page 4 of the PB]. This analysis strengthens the assessee's argument that the purchases made by the assessee were genuine. In the given circumstances, an interpretation can be inferred that the purchases may be from the bogus parties; nevertheless

LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3) , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

bogus purchases u/s. 69C of the Act for AY 2018–19. 16. Consequently, the assessment order was passed under section 153C r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 153D of the Act on 30/3/2022 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 91,270,213/– wherein the major addition contested on unaccounted cash sales of business

LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

bogus purchases u/s. 69C of the Act for AY 2018–19. 16. Consequently, the assessment order was passed under section 153C r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 153D of the Act on 30/3/2022 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 91,270,213/– wherein the major addition contested on unaccounted cash sales of business