RATNAGIRI STAINLESS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4463/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Income Tax Officer 5(3)(1), बनाम/ Ltd., Mumbai. V. 21/23, Laxmi Niwas, 2 Nd Parsiwada Lane, Opp V.P. Road Police Station, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadcr2993P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 2997908/- on account of gross profit @ 12.50% on alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 23983261/- to the total income of the Appellant. Provisions of the Act ought to have been properly construed and regard

SURESH L. SATYANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

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 ITA 3452/Mum/2016 6 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

bogus sales to the extent of Rs.862.57 crores, when investigation carried out during the course of remand proceedings did not yield desired results. Further, we are of the considered view that when the assessee is a habitual offender of falsification of its books of account by booking bogus purchases as well as bogus sales, so as to siphon

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

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

bogus sales to the extent of Rs.862.57 crores, when investigation carried out during the course of remand proceedings did not yield desired results. Further, we are of the considered view that when the assessee is a habitual offender of falsification of its books of account by booking bogus purchases as well as bogus sales, so as to siphon

KHANGARAM K DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

section 143(2) to On the issue of requirement of notice under section 143(2) to On the issue of requirement of notice under section 143(2) to be issued and served subsequent be issued and served subsequent to filing of return of income, the ing of return of income, the Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Mumbai

KHANGARAM K. DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

section 143(2) to On the issue of requirement of notice under section 143(2) to On the issue of requirement of notice under section 143(2) to be issued and served subsequent be issued and served subsequent to filing of return of income, the ing of return of income, the Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Mumbai

KHANGARAM K. DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

section 143(2) to On the issue of requirement of notice under section 143(2) to On the issue of requirement of notice under section 143(2) to be issued and served subsequent be issued and served subsequent to filing of return of income, the ing of return of income, the Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Mumbai