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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

bogus purchases. Accordingly, ground numbers 1 – 2 of the appeal of the AO are dismissed. 026. The ground number three is with respect to the disallowance u/s 14 A of ₹ 105,094,178/–, deleted by the learned CIT – A on the argument that there is no exempt M/s Wind World India

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

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

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO also made addition towards bogus purchases

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

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

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO also made addition towards bogus purchases

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S ASIAN STAR COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S Asian Star Company Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3) Room No.803, 8Th Floor, 114-C, Mitta Court, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, Churchgate, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca4856B Assessee By : Shri Suchek Anchaliya, Ms. Vaishali More, Ars Revenue By : Smt. Shailja Rai, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2023

bogus in nature and commission paid by the appellant is non-genuine, simultaneous effect should have been given while passing the scrutiny assessments in the four cases. Instead, receipt of commission in all four cases has not been disturbed as neither the books of accounts are rejected not the commission receipts have been categorised under "income from other sources". There

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue for AYs 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2014-15 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 880/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 879/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 882/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 881/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 883/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

bogus 24,92,650 1,08,17,902 29,39,917 69,98,521 - purchases 7. Disallowance of 67,41,600 66,18,000 69,48,900 69,48,900 - professional fees paid 8. Disallowance of sales 12,74,70,526 14,42,93,377 21,00,46,026 24,42,74,056 24,62,91,946 promotion expenses

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER-19(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KDM IMPEX, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed, in terms of our\naforesaid observations

deemed to the be the income of the assessee shall\nnot be allowed as a deduction under any head of income.\nFrom a perusal of the provisions of section 69C it is clear that\nthe, following conditions are required to be met:-\n(i) The taxpayer has incurred expenditure;\n(ii) he offers no explanation about the source

DCIT-C-6(2), MUMBAI vs. SAMIRA HABITATS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objection by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.5714/Mum/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assessment Year : 2009-10

bogus purchase to 50%. Accordingly, the same is upheld, and Ground No. (i) raised in its Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 15. The issue arising in Grounds No. (ii) to (iv), raised in Revenue’s appeal, pertains to restricting the addition made on account of on-money received by the assessee. 16. The brief facts of the case pertaining

SHRI ANAND M GUPTA,LUCKNOW vs. ITO - 15(1)(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleestate Of Shri Anand M. Gupta V. Income Tax Officer – 15(1)(4) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road {Through Legal Heir Mumbai - 400020 Mrs. Madhu Anand Gupta} B-723, Sector – C Mahanagar, Lucknow – 226006 Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aabae8078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Malav Sheth Shri Ashish Kumar Department Represented By :

bogus. 4 Estate of Shri Anand M. Gupta 5. In response assessee by relying on various case laws submitted that assessee had purchased 25000 equity shares of TTL (old name: Omnitech Petroleum Ltd.) for ₹.2,50,000/- through a broker Skunk Tradelink Limited on 24.02.2012. This is off-market transaction and these shares were later dematerialized. Owing to share split

JAGUAR SERVICES PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

dividend, interest, etc. The Assessee filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 on 30/10/2018 declaring business loss of INR.55,83,331/-. The case of the Assessee was not picked up for regular scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) the Act. However, subsequently, re- assessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act were initiated in the case

DCIT- CC5(2), MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD., MUMBAI

deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of \nthe Act, cash in hand and adhoc addition out of expenses and \ninterest payment to Ravi Cooperative Bank. The new claim of \nassessee in the returns of income on account of depreciation on \nMotor Car in assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 and loss on \ntrading of shares in assessment year