DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Income Tax Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is computed in accordance with

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Incom Under the existing provisions of Section 44 of the Income Tax Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is Act, the profits and gains of any insurance business is computed in accordance with

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

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 ()

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. PRITI NILESH JAIN DAGA, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

PRITI NILESH JAIN DAGA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

VIJAYA PRAKASH NAGORI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 32(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Om Prakash Kantvijaya Prakash Nagori Vs. Ito, Ward, 32(2)(1) 409/C, Abhar Jp Road, Kautilya Bhawan, C-41- Seven Bungalows, Andhere 43, Avenue, 3, Near (W), Mumbai – 400 061. Videsh Bhavan, G Block Bkc Pan/Gir No. Aekpr2943H (Applicant) (Respondent)

section 10(38) - Assessing Officer treated purchase as bogus and added it to total income - Commissioner (Appeals) examined all relevant

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

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

10-2011 was at Rs.196,36,13,596. The banks have filed suit against the assessee as its account become NPA and possession of several assets of the assessee as well as the guarantors have been taken by the bank under Sarfarsi Act, 2002. The Ld.AR further submitted that majority of the bogus entries passed for the impugned bogus purchases

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

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

10-2011 was at Rs.196,36,13,596. The banks have filed suit against the assessee as its account become NPA and possession of several assets of the assessee as well as the guarantors have been taken by the bank under Sarfarsi Act, 2002. The Ld.AR further submitted that majority of the bogus entries passed for the impugned bogus purchases

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

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the ) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. On further appeal On further appeal, the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. Aggrieved, , the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal raising grounds reproduced above. the Revenue is in appeal raising grounds reproduced above. the Revenue is in appeal raising grounds reproduced

RAJENDRA KUMAR MUNDRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

10(38), read with section 147, of 260 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains IN THE ITAT - Income arising from transfer of long- AHMEDABAD BENCH 'B' term securities (Bogus transactions) - Pratik Suryakant Shah v. AY 2006-07 - Assesse purchased

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee from AY 2013-14 to

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

38,57,021 litres of diesel, as much as 50.34% has been purchased from the three parties, i.e. M/s. Shri Ambaji Petroleum, M/s. Uganda Service Station and M/s. K.M. Suchak & Co. In the opinion of the AO, it is unlikely that purchase of 50.34% of diesel purchases are bogus which appears to be impossible for running such a huge fleet