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

purchases recorded in the computer of the assessee firm containing date wise purchases made by the assessee from Malpe were found. When confronted, the partner present during the course of the survey proceedings, clarified that the purchases under the column "MalpePur Actual" represented the actual purchases for which payments had been made by NEFT/RTGS and ITA Nos.62 to 66/Bang/2023

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

purchases recorded in the computer of the assessee firm containing date wise purchases made by the assessee from Malpe were found. When confronted, the partner present during the course of the survey proceedings, clarified that the purchases under the column "MalpePur Actual" represented the actual purchases for which payments had been made by NEFT/RTGS and ITA Nos.62 to 66/Bang/2023

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

purchases recorded in the computer of the assessee firm containing date wise purchases made by the assessee from Malpe were found. When confronted, the partner present during the course of the survey proceedings, clarified that the purchases under the column "MalpePur Actual" represented the actual purchases for which payments had been made by NEFT/RTGS and ITA Nos.62 to 66/Bang/2023

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

purchases recorded in the computer of the assessee firm containing date wise purchases made by the assessee from Malpe were found. When confronted, the partner present during the course of the survey proceedings, clarified that the purchases under the column "MalpePur Actual" represented the actual purchases for which payments had been made by NEFT/RTGS and ITA Nos.62 to 66/Bang/2023

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\npurchases. Since the facts are similar in all these assessment\nyears, we consider the facts in assessment year 2013-14.\n2.2 The appellant is engaged in the production of fish meal and\nextraction of fish oil. A search and seizure operation under Section\n132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short \"The Act\") was carried\nout

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\npurchases. Since the facts are similar in all these assessment\nyears, we consider the facts in assessment year 2013-14.\n2.2 The appellant is engaged in the production of fish meal and\nextraction of fish oil. A search and seizure operation under Section\n132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short \"The Act\") was carried\nout

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

26 of 51 5. On the other hand, the ld. D.R. submitted that reiterated the findings of ld. CIT(A) in its latest order dated 24.1.2023, the gist of which is reproduced in para 3.6 above and requested to dismiss the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. Findings on the bogus purchases: 6. We have heard the rival submissions

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

26 of 51 5. On the other hand, the ld. D.R. submitted that reiterated the findings of ld. CIT(A) in its latest order dated 24.1.2023, the gist of which is reproduced in para 3.6 above and requested to dismiss the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. Findings on the bogus purchases: 6. We have heard the rival submissions

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

26 of 51 5. On the other hand, the ld. D.R. submitted that reiterated the findings of ld. CIT(A) in its latest order dated 24.1.2023, the gist of which is reproduced in para 3.6 above and requested to dismiss the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. Findings on the bogus purchases: 6. We have heard the rival submissions

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

26 of 51 5. On the other hand, the ld. D.R. submitted that reiterated the findings of ld. CIT(A) in its latest order dated 24.1.2023, the gist of which is reproduced in para 3.6 above and requested to dismiss the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. Findings on the bogus purchases: 6. We have heard the rival submissions

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

26 of 40 the said purchases are disallowed then the profit margin that would work out after disallowing the purchases would lead to absolute result which cannot be achieved in the line of business of the appellant on the facts and circumstances of the case. ix. without prejudice, that if at all the purchases were to be treated as bogus

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

26 of 40 the said purchases are disallowed then the profit margin that would work out after disallowing the purchases would lead to absolute result which cannot be achieved in the line of business of the appellant on the facts and circumstances of the case. ix. without prejudice, that if at all the purchases were to be treated as bogus

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

26 of 40 the said purchases are disallowed then the profit margin that would work out after disallowing the purchases would lead to absolute result which cannot be achieved in the line of business of the appellant on the facts and circumstances of the case. ix. without prejudice, that if at all the purchases were to be treated as bogus

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

26 of 40 the said purchases are disallowed then the profit margin that would work out after disallowing the purchases would lead to absolute result which cannot be achieved in the line of business of the appellant on the facts and circumstances of the case. ix. without prejudice, that if at all the purchases were to be treated as bogus

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

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

26 of 40\nITA Nos.410-412-169-170-\nCO 6/Bang/2024\nthe said purchases are disallowed then the profit margin\nthat would work out after disallowing the purchases would\nlead to absolute result which cannot be achieved in the line\nof business of the appellant on the facts and circumstances\nof the case.\nix.\nwithout prejudice, that if at all the purchases were

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BANGALORE

26-9-2019: AR & Sons: Rs.135402\n3.18-12-2020: AR & Sons: Rs.1062217\nI am also furnishing the revised list of bogus bills as annexure 10.\nQ.72 I have gone through the bills and have considered your submission regarding the\nsame. A revised year wise calculation after removing these three bills is presented\nbelow:\nBogus Purchase\nFY\nBills\n16-17\n13519023

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BENGALURU

26-9-2019: AR & Sons: Rs.135402\n3.18-12-2020: AR & Sons: Rs.1062217\nI am also furnishing the revised list of bogus bills as annexure 10.\nQ.72 I have gone through the bills and have considered your submission regarding the\nsame. A revised year wise calculation after removing these three bills is presented\nbelow:\nBogus Purchase\nFY\nBills\n16-17\n13519023

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,MANGALORE, MANGALORE vs. RAJ DIAMONDS, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed &

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19

section Date of Notice 1 148A(b) 10/03/2022 2 148A(d) 23/03/2022 3 148 23/03/2022 4 129 01/07/2022 5 143(2)* No valid Return filed by the assessee 6 142(1) 17/11/2022 7 Show Cause Notice 18/03/2023 The claim of the AO is that the assessee did not file any return of income in response to notice