THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SKYWAY INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, whereas appeals of the revenue are par...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

bogus purchase ignoring the fact that the assessee failed failed failed to to to prove prove prove the the the genuineness genuineness genuineness of of of purchases, purchases, purchases, andany andany andany expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee cheques

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 ()

153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was completed on tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was completed on tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was completed on 28.12.2017 assessing the total income at Rs.155,13,50,398/-. 28.12.2017 assessing the total income at Rs.155,13,50,398/ 28.12.2017 assessing the total income

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 ()

153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was completed on tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was completed on tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was completed on 28.12.2017 assessing the total income at Rs.155,13,50,398/-. 28.12.2017 assessing the total income at Rs.155,13,50,398/ 28.12.2017 assessing the total income

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

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

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. 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)

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. 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)

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. 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)

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. 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)

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. 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)

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. 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)

Section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer assessed the income of the Assessee at INR.58,16,60,720/- after making the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount (in INR) 1. Alleged bogus purchases

SURENDRA GARG HUF ,MUMBAI vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

bogus LTCG entries | shares\navailed\n1.\nKGN Enterprises Ltd.\n44200\n1,87,66,525\n\n4.\nOn the basis of the aforesaid information available with the\nundersigned, I have reason to believe that income chargeable\nto tax, as indicated above, to the tune of Rs.1,87,66,525/- or\nproceedings for reassessment, has escaped assessment with\nthe meaning of section

THE DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) ., MUMBAI vs. RPS INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

bogus purchases, jobwork &labour expenses sub-contract expenses, job found/seized. and labour and unsecured loans were 4.3.4 It is a well settled law that in the unabated assessment order, no addition u/s 153A can be made unless there is some incriminating material with respect to the addition made by the AO. The Hon'ble ITAT, Special Bench, Mumbai

THE DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) ., MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHAH & PARIKH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit, Vs. M/S Shah & Parikh Central Circle 5(1), 2, Vallabh Niwas, Room No. 1928, 19Th Malviya Road, Floor, Air India Bldg, Vile Parle(E), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400057 Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aajfs4684D Appellant .. Respondent

section 153A of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" 2 "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SPECO INFRASTRUCTURE, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

bogus purchases, job work and labour and unsecured loans. Thus, can be safely inferred that during the course of search proceedings, no incriminating material/evidences in relation to the purchases,jobworks& labour expenses and unsecured loans taken by the appellant was found /seized M/s. Speco Infrastructure, Mumbai. 4.3.4 It is a well settled law that in the unabated assessment order

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SAKET INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

bogus purchases, o work X DEPAPenses sub-contract expenses, job found/seized. and labour and unsecured loans were 4.3.4 It is a well settled law that in the unabated assessment order, no addition u/s 153A can be made M/s. Saket Infra Projects Pvt Ltd, Mumbai. unless there is some incriminating material with respect to the addition made

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S PRITI CONSTRUCTION , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

bogus purchases, jobworks& labour expenses and unsecured loan taken by the appellant company was found/seized. 4.3.4 It is a well settled law that in the unabated assessment order, no addition u/s 153A can be made unless there is some incriminating material with respect to the addition made by the AO. The Hon'ble ITAT, Special Bench, Mumbai

SURENDRA GARG HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

bogus LTCG entries shares\navailed\n1.\nKGN Enterprises Ltd.\n44200\n1,87,66,525\n4.\nOn the basis of the aforesaid information available with the\nundersigned, I have reason to believe that income chargeable\nto tax, as indicated above, to the tune of Rs.1,87,66,525/- or\nproceedings for reassessment, has escaped assessment with\nthe meaning of section

KONARK INFRASTRUCTURE (WATER SUPPLY - UMC) (J/V),ULHASNAGAR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -4, THANE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed, for AYs

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3021, 3022, 3023 & 3024/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Konark Infrastructure बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle – 4 (Water Supply-Umc) (J/V) 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Vs. 1St Floor, Sapna Talkies, 16Z, Waghle Estate, Konark Plaza, Near Sapna Thane (W) Garden, Ulhasnagar 42100. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaak9702G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3058, 3061, 3060 & 3059/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Dcit, Central Circle – 4 बिधम/ Konark Infrastructure 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, (Water Supply-Umc) Vs. 16Z, Waghle Estate, Thane (J/V) (W) 1St Floor, Sapna Talkies, Konark Plaza, Near Sapna Garden, Ulhasnagar 42100. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaak9702G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Shri Biswanant Das, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06 & 14/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench All These Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-11, Pune, All Dated 30-06- 2023 For Ays 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & Ay 2017-18. Since The Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals Have Been Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Raised Similar Arguments On These A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2015-16 Konark Infrastructure., Issues. Accordingly, We Dispose Off All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

bogus purchases was unjustified in law and he thus urged that the impugned order be quashed. 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue supported the action of AO. He argued that, the assessee had not placed the order of ITSC before the AO and therefore he cannot seek shelter of this order now. According to him, search

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THANE WEST vs. KONARK INFRASTRUCTURE (WATER SUPPLY-UMC)(JV), ULHASNAGAR, ULHASNAGAR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed, for AYs

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3021, 3022, 3023 & 3024/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Konark Infrastructure बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle – 4 (Water Supply-Umc) (J/V) 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Vs. 1St Floor, Sapna Talkies, 16Z, Waghle Estate, Konark Plaza, Near Sapna Thane (W) Garden, Ulhasnagar 42100. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaak9702G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3058, 3061, 3060 & 3059/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18) Dcit, Central Circle – 4 बिधम/ Konark Infrastructure 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, (Water Supply-Umc) Vs. 16Z, Waghle Estate, Thane (J/V) (W) 1St Floor, Sapna Talkies, Konark Plaza, Near Sapna Garden, Ulhasnagar 42100. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaak9702G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Shri Biswanant Das, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06 & 14/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench All These Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-11, Pune, All Dated 30-06- 2023 For Ays 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & Ay 2017-18. Since The Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals Have Been Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Raised Similar Arguments On These A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2015-16 Konark Infrastructure., Issues. Accordingly, We Dispose Off All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

bogus purchases was unjustified in law and he thus urged that the impugned order be quashed. 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue supported the action of AO. He argued that, the assessee had not placed the order of ITSC before the AO and therefore he cannot seek shelter of this order now. According to him, search