DCIT 3(1)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

13. We note that the Learned CIT(A) had deleted penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act observing that the addition in respect of alleged bogus purchases

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

13. We note that the Learned CIT(A) had deleted penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act observing that the addition in respect of alleged bogus purchases

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

13. We note that the Learned CIT(A) had deleted penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act observing that the addition in respect of alleged bogus purchases

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

13. We note that the Learned CIT(A) had deleted penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act observing that the addition in respect of alleged bogus purchases

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

13. We note that the Learned CIT(A) had deleted penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act observing that the addition in respect of alleged bogus purchases

HEMAL MAGANLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalhemal Maganlal Shah 84, 4Th Floor, Pankaj-B, Lbs Road, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai-400086. Pan: Amfps8271G ...... Appellant Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. H.M. Shah Respondent By : Sh. Prasoon Kabra Date Of Hearing : 17/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/08/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

bogus and penalty under section 271(1)(c) was also imposed. Held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was specific on account of unverifiable purchases on which gross profit at 25 per cent was applied and added in the income. The assessee has not been able to produce these parties for verification and also summons was returned back

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 ()

c) of the Act levied based on estimated addition of the Act levied based on estimated addition of bogus purchases is unsustainable. The assessing officer is of bogus purchases is unsustainable. The assessing officer is of bogus purchases is unsustainable. The assessing officer is directed to delete the penalty. The grounds of appeals are directed to delete the penalty

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 ()

c) of the Act levied based on estimated addition of the Act levied based on estimated addition of bogus purchases is unsustainable. The assessing officer is of bogus purchases is unsustainable. The assessing officer is of bogus purchases is unsustainable. The assessing officer is directed to delete the penalty. The grounds of appeals are directed to delete the penalty

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DINESH SOMATMAL DHOKAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm

bogus purchases the penalty levied by the learned Assessing Officer and confirmed by the learned CIT (A) is sustainable or not. As the facts and circumstances leading to the addition in both these 08. appeals are similar, the learned Authorized Representative Ms. Ridhisha Jain, submitted a detailed written submission contesting the first ground of appeal stating that both the penalty

DINESH SOMATMAL DHOKAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm

bogus purchases the penalty levied by the learned Assessing Officer and confirmed by the learned CIT (A) is sustainable or not. As the facts and circumstances leading to the addition in both these 08. appeals are similar, the learned Authorized Representative Ms. Ridhisha Jain, submitted a detailed written submission contesting the first ground of appeal stating that both the penalty

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

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

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

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