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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

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

1) the addition made by the AO of Rs. 28,46,859/- related to hawala /bogus purchases identified by the Sales Tax Department, (ii) the addition made of Rs. 27,79,200/ related to purchases from certain bogus suppliers identified during the search action and (i) the addition of the estimated amount of Rs. 22,34,11

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

11. The ld. AR submitted that this issue is considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case where it has been held that “7. The issue is inter-connected with Ground 1; so the issue is covered in favour of the assesse in consolidated order dated 10/11/2022 passed by the Special Bench of ITAT, Mumbai Bench

DY..C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BANGALORE

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

11. The ld. AR submitted that this issue is considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case where it has been held that “7. The issue is inter-connected with Ground 1; so the issue is covered in favour of the assesse in consolidated order dated 10/11/2022 passed by the Special Bench of ITAT, Mumbai Bench

BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

1. On the facts and in law, the Hon. CIT (A) erred in confirming addition of Rs.12,89,039/ addition of Rs.12,89,039/-, on account of purchase treated as , on account of purchase treated as income from Hawala dealers as per the income from Hawala dealers as per the information provided by information provided by Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra

BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

1. On the facts and in law, the Hon. CIT (A) erred in confirming addition of Rs.12,89,039/ addition of Rs.12,89,039/-, on account of purchase treated as , on account of purchase treated as income from Hawala dealers as per the income from Hawala dealers as per the information provided by information provided by Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra

NAVNIDHI STEEL AND ENGG CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

Section 40A(3) of the Act. By adopting these measures, the purchases were inflated as raw material diamond were available in grey market at much lower price .The diamond merchants issues cheques in favour of benami concerns against purchase bills obtained by them against which they receive cash. The list of such benami companies was found during the course

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

11. Enterprises Enterprises 72,37,251 72,37,251 Total Total 2,75,25,669/ 2,75,25,669/- 4. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that against the bogus On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that against the bogus On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that against the bogus bills, assessee must have

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

11. Enterprises Enterprises 72,37,251 72,37,251 Total Total 2,75,25,669/ 2,75,25,669/- 4. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that against the bogus On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that against the bogus On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that against the bogus bills, assessee must have

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

section 234A. 234B and 234C and 234D of the Act 234C and 234D of the Act 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee filed its Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee filed its Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the year under