PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

PANCHSHEEL BUILDTECH PVT. LTD.,,NOIDA vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kanti.T. Appeal Nos. 5087 To 5091/Del/2016 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2013-14 Panchsheel Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, H–169, Sector : 63, Vs. Central Circle, Noida [U.P.] Ghaziabad. Pan : Aaecp 3492 N A N D I.T. Appeal Nos. 5062 To 5066/Del/2016 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2013-14 Panchsheel Realtech Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, H–169, Sector : 63, Vs. Central Circle, Noida [U.P.] Ghaziabad. Pan : Aaecp 5726 F (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Mehra, C. A.; Department By : Ms. Paramita Tripathy, Cit [Dr]; Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.06.2017 O R D E R Per I. C. Sudhir, J. M. :

bogus purchases made by appellant from various concerns. We find that in the immediately succeeding year i.e. assessment year 2014-15 in the assessment framed under section 143(3) the Assessing Officer has accepted net profit of Rs.2,02,92,980/- on a turnover of Rs.36,75,39,959/- giving NP rate of 5.52%. We thus adopting the same reasons

PANCHSHEEL REALTECH PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kanti.T. Appeal Nos. 5087 To 5091/Del/2016 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2013-14 Panchsheel Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, H–169, Sector : 63, Vs. Central Circle, Noida [U.P.] Ghaziabad. Pan : Aaecp 3492 N A N D I.T. Appeal Nos. 5062 To 5066/Del/2016 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2013-14 Panchsheel Realtech Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, H–169, Sector : 63, Vs. Central Circle, Noida [U.P.] Ghaziabad. Pan : Aaecp 5726 F (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Mehra, C. A.; Department By : Ms. Paramita Tripathy, Cit [Dr]; Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.06.2017 O R D E R Per I. C. Sudhir, J. M. :

bogus purchases made by appellant from various concerns. We find that in the immediately succeeding year i.e. assessment year 2014-15 in the assessment framed under section 143(3) the Assessing Officer has accepted net profit of Rs.2,02,92,980/- on a turnover of Rs.36,75,39,959/- giving NP rate of 5.52%. We thus adopting the same reasons

CHARBUJA MARMO (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. PR.CIT- 2 , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

143(3)- However, pursuant to reassessment notice, which was dropped due to technical reasons, and later notice was issued and assessments were taken up afresh-After considering submissions of assessee and documents produced in reassessment proceedings, AO added back a sum of Rs.1,35,00,000-CIT(A) held against assessee 89 ITA.No.4749/Del./2019 M/s. Charbuja Marmo (India

ADITI INFRABUILD AND SERVICES LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 30, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

bogus purchases. Accordingly, addition to extent of Rs. 2,67,17,059/- is confirmed and remaining addition of Rs. 18,70,19,413/- is deleted.” 8. With regard to addition of Rs.6.25 crores, ld. CIT (A) has deleted the addition with the following observations :- “12.3 On perusal of the job work receipts for the relevant A.Y. submitted by the appellant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD vs. MAHALAKSHMI LIGHT HOUSE, HAPUR

In the result, Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapur Chungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

section 69C of the Act, as unexplained expenditure on account of bogus purchases made by the assessee from Vrindavan International Trade Pvt. Ltd. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in holding the transactions done by the assessee with shell company Vrindavan International Trade

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

bogus purchases booked and sale of scrap outside the books by the assessee of unaccounted expenditure, which has been incurred, by the assessee for carrying out all these activities. Therefore, in view of above, we hold that only the profit element embedded therein or unaccounted expenditure not disclosed in the seized documents is required to be added to the income

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

bogus purchases booked and sale of scrap outside the books by the assessee of unaccounted expenditure, which has been incurred, by the assessee for carrying out all these activities. Therefore, in view of above, we hold that only the profit element embedded therein or unaccounted expenditure not disclosed in the seized documents is required to be added to the income

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

bogus purchases booked and sale of scrap outside the books by the assessee of unaccounted expenditure, which has been incurred, by the assessee for carrying out all these activities. Therefore, in view of above, we hold that only the profit element embedded therein or unaccounted expenditure not disclosed in the seized documents is required to be added to the income

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

bogus purchases booked and sale of scrap outside the books by the assessee of unaccounted expenditure, which has been incurred, by the assessee for carrying out all these activities. Therefore, in view of above, we hold that only the profit element embedded therein or unaccounted expenditure not disclosed in the seized documents is required to be added to the income

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

bogus purchases booked and sale of scrap outside the books by the assessee of unaccounted expenditure, which has been incurred, by the assessee for carrying out all these activities. Therefore, in view of above, we hold that only the profit element embedded therein or unaccounted expenditure not disclosed in the seized documents is required to be added to the income