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

Bogus purchase 4,52,01,134 5,52,01,134 (Up to 6.2.2018) Partners 1,00,00,000 personal expenses debited to books Rs.45,02,01,134 Total 5.2 However, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2017-18 did not include additional income offered in these assessment years, which was admitted during the course

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

Bogus purchase 4,52,01,134 5,52,01,134 (Up to 6.2.2018) Partners 1,00,00,000 personal expenses debited to books Rs.45,02,01,134 Total 5.2 However, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2017-18 did not include additional income offered in these assessment years, which was admitted during the course

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

Bogus purchase 4,52,01,134 5,52,01,134 (Up to 6.2.2018) Partners 1,00,00,000 personal expenses debited to books Rs.45,02,01,134 Total 5.2 However, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2017-18 did not include additional income offered in these assessment years, which was admitted during the course

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

Bogus purchase 4,52,01,134 5,52,01,134 (Up to 6.2.2018) Partners 1,00,00,000 personal expenses debited to books Rs.45,02,01,134 Total 5.2 However, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2017-18 did not include additional income offered in these assessment years, which was admitted during the course

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

Bogus purchase 4,52,01,134 5,52,01,134 (Up to 6.2.2018) Partners 1,00,00,000 personal expenses debited to books Rs.45,02,01,134 Total 5.2 However, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2017-18 did not include additional income offered in these assessment years, which was admitted during the course

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. 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

natural justice which\nhave been from time to time used, but, whatever standard is\nadopted, one essential is that the person concerned should have\na reasonable opportunity of presenting his case.”\n[Emphasis supplied]\n33. Further, the argument of learned counsel for the Revenue that this\nmistake is curable under Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain

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

natural justice which\nhave been from time to time used, but, whatever standard is\nadopted, one essential is that the person concerned should have\na reasonable opportunity of presenting his case.”\n[Emphasis supplied]\n33.\nFurther, the argument of learned counsel for the Revenue that this\nmistake is curable under Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain

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 grapes and bottles from three vendors (Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, Srinivasa Bottle Traders and Venkateshwara Bottle Traders) is bogus. This opportunity ought to have been given by the AO as a general principle of natural justice

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 grapes and bottles from three vendors (Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, Srinivasa Bottle Traders and Venkateshwara Bottle Traders) is bogus. This opportunity ought to have been given by the AO as a general principle of natural justice

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 grapes and bottles from three vendors (Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, Srinivasa Bottle Traders and Venkateshwara Bottle Traders) is bogus. This opportunity ought to have been given by the AO as a general principle of natural justice

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 grapes and bottles from three vendors (Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, Srinivasa Bottle Traders and Venkateshwara Bottle Traders) is bogus. This opportunity ought to have been given by the AO as a general principle of natural justice

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

purchases by the appellant from the said company as bogus and the appellant was not provided with any details and documents gathered against him and also an opportunity of cross-examination of the said companies ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 27 of 40 were not provided to the appellant which is against the principles of natural justice

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

purchases by the appellant from the said company as bogus and the appellant was not provided with any details and documents gathered against him and also an opportunity of cross-examination of the said companies ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 27 of 40 were not provided to the appellant which is against the principles of natural justice

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BAENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

purchases by the appellant from the said company as bogus and the appellant was not provided with any details and documents gathered against him and also an opportunity of cross-examination of the said companies ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 27 of 40 were not provided to the appellant which is against the principles of natural justice

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

purchases by the appellant from the said company as bogus and the appellant was not provided with any details and documents gathered against him and also an opportunity of cross-examination of the said companies ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 27 of 40 were not provided to the appellant which is against the principles of natural justice

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Bogus purchase) - Certain portion of purchases made by assessee was disallowed - Commissioner (Appeals) found that entire disallowance was based on third party information gathered by Investigation Wing of Department, which had not been independently subjected to further verification by Assessing Officer and he had not provided copy of such statements to assessee, thus, denying opportunity of cross examination to assessee

MOHAMMED IBRABIM MOHIDEEN ,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Bogus purchase) - Certain portion of purchases made by assessee was disallowed - Commissioner (Appeals) found that entire disallowance was based on third party information gathered by Investigation Wing of Department, which had not been independently subjected to further verification by Assessing Officer and he had not provided copy of such statements to assessee, thus, denying opportunity of cross examination to assessee