KALPSARU DIAMONDS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

reopening of the assessment involving bogus purchases based on reopening of the assessment involving bogus purchases based on reopening of the assessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -23(1) , MUMBAI vs. KALPSARU DIAMONDS, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

reopening of the assessment involving bogus purchases based on reopening of the assessment involving bogus purchases based on reopening of the assessment

NIRMIT JATIN LATHIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 29(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Ito 29(2)(2), 2B/101, Jain Upashraya Lane, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Tagore Nagar, Vikhroli East, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 41(2)(3), Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Room No. 732, Om Sai Chs, Bldg. No. 2, B-Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Flat No. 101, Opp Bharat Nagar Mumbai-400051. Jain Upashraya Lane, Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent

reopening is bad in law. 2. Invalid Assessment Procedure: 2. Invalid Assessment Procedure: a. The Id. A.O. has erred in law and on facts while passing a. The Id. A.O. has erred in law and on facts while passing a. The Id. A.O. has erred in law and on facts while passing assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. assessment

ITO41(2)(3),MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. NIRMIT JATIN LATHIA, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Ito 29(2)(2), 2B/101, Jain Upashraya Lane, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Tagore Nagar, Vikhroli East, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 41(2)(3), Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Room No. 732, Om Sai Chs, Bldg. No. 2, B-Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Flat No. 101, Opp Bharat Nagar Mumbai-400051. Jain Upashraya Lane, Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent

reopening is bad in law. 2. Invalid Assessment Procedure: 2. Invalid Assessment Procedure: a. The Id. A.O. has erred in law and on facts while passing a. The Id. A.O. has erred in law and on facts while passing a. The Id. A.O. has erred in law and on facts while passing assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. assessment

OMKAR METAL AND ALLOYS CORPORATION ,C P TANK MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19. 2. 4, MATRU MANDIR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Omkar Metal & Alloys Ito 19.2.4, Corporation, C P Tank Matru Mandir, Opp Bhatia Room No. 47, Balakrishna Vs. Hospital, Grant Road (West), Niwas, 2Nd Floor, 2Nd Mumbai-400007. Panjarapole Lane, Mumbai-400004. Pan No. Aaafo 4997 N Appellant Respondent

purchase bills which was alleged to be bogus. Accordingly, the AO reopened the assessment was alleged to be bogus. Accordingly

M/S. GURJAR GEMS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 9(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Gurjar Gems Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Circle 9(3)(2), Plot No. F-17 Midc, Marol Aayakar Bhavan, Industrial Area, Opp. Seepz, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Andheri (E), Chakala Midc S.O., Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400093. Pan No. Aaacg 3685 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ravikant Pathak, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Milind S. Chavan, Dr : Date Of Hearing 24/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/03/2023 Order

bogus purchase from Sri Anil Chokara (Prop. Of Keshav Impex) (Prop. Of Keshav Impex) during the year under consideration, the during the year under consideration, the Assessing Officer reopened

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KALYAN vs. J D ELECTRIC WORKS, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2009-10

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Income Income-tax Act, 1961( In short ‘ the Act’) , 1961( In short ‘ the Act’) . In the reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee had reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee had reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee had taken bogus bills amounting

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI , PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (4) MUMBAI, PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI, PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

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

reopened the assessment by way of issue of notice u/s 1 of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the of the Act dated 01.02.2021. In responses to the same, same, the assessee filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory filed return of income on 20.02.2021 and thereafter statutory

TITAN LABORATORIES P LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal o

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Titan Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Dcit Circle-14(3)(1), A/01-Gf & A/101 Plot No. 120, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Anand Bhavan Road, Spectrum Vs. Mumbai-400020. Building, R B Mehta Marg, Tilak Road, Ghatkopare (E), Mumbai-400077. Pan No. Aacct 0509 Q Appellant Respondent

bogus purchase, the assessment was reopened and he assessment was reopened and reassessment was completed on 17.12.2016 u/s 143(3) r.w.s

DCIT CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAN INDUSTRIES (I) LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the both the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

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

reopening and notice u/s 148 of the Act. I proceed to decide the u/s 148 of the Act. I proceed to decide the issue on merits. issue on merits. 9.1. The amounts in question are two credit entries of Rs 9.1. The amounts in question are two credit entries of Rs 9.1. The amounts in question are two credit entries

DCIT CC 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the both the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

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

reopening and notice u/s 148 of the Act. I proceed to decide the u/s 148 of the Act. I proceed to decide the issue on merits. issue on merits. 9.1. The amounts in question are two credit entries of Rs 9.1. The amounts in question are two credit entries of Rs 9.1. The amounts in question are two credit entries