BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

Section 153A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word „reassess‟ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

Section 153A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word „reassess‟ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

Section 153A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word „reassess‟ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis

GOVIND AGARWAL. HUF,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 32, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4531,4566,876,877,878/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2006-07, 2007-08, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2005-06) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Manidevi Agarwal, 720, A- 1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpa 4962 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4528/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal, 701, A-1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adopa 4038 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.873,874/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal(Huf), 720/A-5, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aiepa 3109 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) 876,828,4566,4547,218/11 &957/13&Co203.13

153A shall be computed by considering the originally determined income. If some incriminating material is found in respect of 11 such assessment years for which the assessment is not pending, then the 'total income' would be determined by considering the originally determined income plus income emanating from the incriminating material found during the course of search. In the other scenario

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

153A was made. The learned assessing officer made following additions:- 1. The assessee has claimed purchases from the bogus suppliers identified by the sales tax Department aggregating to ₹ 36,845,487/–. This entire amount was disallowed. 2. AO further found that assessee has claimed purchases from 11 suppliers amounting to ₹ 506,455,949/– where the standard operating procedure normally followed

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

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

1) of Rs.91.19 crores. Although, the assessee has eliminated income by Rs.91.19 crores, but in its submission before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had agreed to ignore such reduction because income cannot be reduced in the returns filed u/s 153A of the Act. The AO ignored reversal of bogus purchases, however, reversal of bogus sales was denied and the income

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

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

1) of Rs.91.19 crores. Although, the assessee has eliminated income by Rs.91.19 crores, but in its submission before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had agreed to ignore such reduction because income cannot be reduced in the returns filed u/s 153A of the Act. The AO ignored reversal of bogus purchases, however, reversal of bogus sales was denied and the income

M/S.BALAJI BULLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-40, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Balaji Bullion & Commodities The Dy. Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcbo236F Balaji Universal Tradelinks P. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002

Bogus Share Application money under section 68 of the IT Act, 1961. Looking to the facts and in the circumstances of your Appellant's case the said addition made by the Ld. A.O. is incorrect and invalid and ought to be deleted as the provisions of section 68 has been complied with. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances

JAYANT B PATEL HUF,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC13, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed,

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.5547, 5548, 5553/Mum/2012 & Ita No.7525/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2001­02, 2003­04 & 2007­08) Jayant B. Patel Huf, B/27, Vs. Acit, Cc­13, Mumbai Clifton Society, Near Centuar Hotel, Juhu Vile Parle (W), Mumbai­49 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahj 1081 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.5455 To 5461/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2001­02 To 2007­08) Acit, Cc­13, Mumbai Vs. Jayant B. Patel Huf, B/27, Clifton Society, Near Centuar Hotel, Juhu Vile Parle (W), Mumbai­49 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahj 1081 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.5549 To 5552, 5554/Mum/2012 &7524/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2001­02, 2003­04 2004­05,2006­07 & 2007­08) Jayant B. Patel, B/27, Clifton Vs. Acit, Cc­13, Mumbai Society, Near Centuar Hotel, Juhu Vile Parle (W), Mumbai­49 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacpp 6414 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivaram & Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Alok Johri सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 13/05/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 10/08/2016

purchase in the month April 2005 and sales in August, 2006. As per ld. AR the sale of shares of Tripex Ltd. was made in the assessment year 2007­08 and not in the assessment year 2001­02, therefore, the AO was not justified in making 9 ITA No.5547-5561 & 7524&7525/12 addition in the assessment year 2001­02. In the interest of justice