WIND WORLD INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

DCIT - CC 3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITEAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

WIND WORLD INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITEAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

deduction. Accordingly, ground No 8 of the appeal is dismissed. 8.2 In ground no. 9, the assessee has contended that these unaccounted cash expenses should have been allowed to be set off against the addition made by the AO of Rs 22,90,37,427/- on account of bogus purchases

ITO 25(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. ACTUBE ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3941/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) बिाम/ Income Tax Officer-25(2)(1) Actube Enterprises Room No. 505, C-10, 5Th 27, Laxmi Flat Owner Floor, Pratyakshkar Chs Limited , V. Bhavan, Bkc, M.G. Road Extension, Bandra(East), Vile Parle(East), Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400057 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aabfa2570J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Vivek Anand Ojha (Dr) Assessee By: Apurva R. Shah (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.08.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 3941/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 15.03.2017 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-37/It-722/Ito-25(2)(1)/15-16, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-37, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year(Ay) 2010-11, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay:2010-11. I.T.A. No.3941/Mum/2017

bogus accommodation entries being provided by these hawala dealers who are issuing accommodation bills without supplying any material physically. The AO also referred to provision of section 101,102 and 106 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and concluded that the assessee has failed to discharge its primary onus to establish that these purchase are genuine purchases. The AO also

ITO 6 (1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S A J COAL PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

bogus and the entire quantity of opening stock, Purchases and the quantity manufactured opening stock, Purchases and the quantity manufactured opening stock, Purchases and the quantity manufactured during the year under during the year under consideration sold by the assessee consideration sold by the assessee and that the finished goods were Purchased by the and that the finished goods were

M/S A J COAL PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

bogus and the entire quantity of opening stock, Purchases and the quantity manufactured opening stock, Purchases and the quantity manufactured opening stock, Purchases and the quantity manufactured during the year under during the year under consideration sold by the assessee consideration sold by the assessee and that the finished goods were Purchased by the and that the finished goods were

M/S. PARAS PLASTIC PROCESSORS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-27(2)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Paras Plastic Processors, Income Tax Officer 806/807, Ajit Nath, Ward-27(2)(5), Nilkantha Enclave, Ajit Nagar, Vs. Vashi, Opp. Shreyash Cinema, Navi Mumbai-400-703. Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400086. Pan No. Aaefp 8206 H Appellant Respondent

deduction of Rs.1.33 crores on account of purchases merely on the basis of suspicion because the on account of purchases merely on the basis of suspicion because the on account of purchases merely on the basis of suspicion because the sellers and the canvassing agents have not been produced before them. sellers and the canvassing agents have not been produced

HYDROAIR TECTONICS (PCD) LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

bogus sales to the extent of Rs.862.57 crores, when investigation carried out during the course of remand proceedings did not yield desired results. Further, we are of the considered view that when the assessee is a habitual offender of falsification of its books of account by booking bogus purchases as well as bogus sales, so as to siphon

RAJKUMARI SINGH,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 8, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

bogus sales to the extent of Rs.862.57 crores, when investigation carried out during the course of remand proceedings did not yield desired results. Further, we are of the considered view that when the assessee is a habitual offender of falsification of its books of account by booking bogus purchases as well as bogus sales, so as to siphon

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SILMOHAN GEMS PRIVATE LIMTED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. This being a finding of fact, we have proceeded on such basis. Despit basis. Despite this, the question arises whether the Revenue is e this, the question arises whether the Revenue is correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be correct in contending that the entire purchase

SILMOHAN GEMS PVT LTD. COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. This being a finding of fact, we have proceeded on such basis. Despit basis. Despite this, the question arises whether the Revenue is e this, the question arises whether the Revenue is correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be correct in contending that the entire purchase

SILMOHAN GEMS PVT LTD. COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. This being a finding of fact, we have proceeded on such basis. Despit basis. Despite this, the question arises whether the Revenue is e this, the question arises whether the Revenue is correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be correct in contending that the entire purchase amount should be correct in contending that the entire purchase