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

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 made bogus purchases from the market assessee must

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

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

bogus sales. The ld. AR also argued the case in light of provisions of section 153A and submitted that it does not amount to fresh claim in return filed u/s 153A. The Ld.AR 38 Hydroair Tectonics (PCD) Ltd further submitted that in case of abated assessments, the assessee can very well make a claim which was not made in original

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

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

bogus sales. The ld. AR also argued the case in light of provisions of section 153A and submitted that it does not amount to fresh claim in return filed u/s 153A. The Ld.AR 38 Hydroair Tectonics (PCD) Ltd further submitted that in case of abated assessments, the assessee can very well make a claim which was not made in original

LAXMI TRADING COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

LUNKARAN KOTHARI,SURAT vs. ACIT CC -1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

AMIT DIAMONDS,GUJARAT vs. ACIT CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

LAVAPAL R. SINGH,GUJARAT vs. SCIT , CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

ABHIMAN GEMS PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT .CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

LITTLE DIAM ,GUJARAT vs. ACIT CC -1(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

ANKITA EXPORTS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Sr. No.

section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in violation of the principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, e facts and in the circumstances of the case

DCIT 4(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. SUNRISE METALLIC (INDIA) P.LD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit 4(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Sunrise Metallic R.No.649, 6Th Floor (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan Shiva Industrial Estate, Mumbai – 400 020 Near Tata Power House Lake Road, Bhandup (W) Mumbai – 400 078 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs2965E Appellant) Respondent) ..

251 (Bom) Where the identity of the persons from whom goods are purchases has been explained, payment are made by account payee cheques, transactions are recorded in books, no addition can be made.. ITO V/s Suhana Trading 92 ITD 212 (M.um)(para 98) Where a quantitative tally of sales is furnished, even if purchasers are not available, no addition

REFRIGERATED DEISTRIBUTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

bogus, but were made from parties other than those mentioned in books of account, only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of Law arose in such estimation While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also retied on the decision in the case

REFRIGERATED DEISTRIBUTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

bogus, but were made from parties other than those mentioned in books of account, only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of Law arose in such estimation While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also retied on the decision in the case

REFRIGERATED DEISTRIBUTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

bogus, but were made from parties other than those mentioned in books of account, only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of Law arose in such estimation While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also retied on the decision in the case

DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. REFRIGERATED DISTRIBUTORS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

bogus, but were made from parties other than those mentioned in books of account, only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of Law arose in such estimation While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also retied on the decision in the case

REFRIGERATED DEISTRIBUTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

bogus, but were made from parties other than those mentioned in books of account, only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of Law arose in such estimation While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also retied on the decision in the case

REFRIGERATED DEISTRIBUTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of assessee are partly allowed and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

bogus, but were made from parties other than those mentioned in books of account, only the profit element embedded in such purchases could be added to the assessee's income and as such no question of Law arose in such estimation While arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon'ble Court also retied on the decision in the case

BALAJI BULLIONS AND COMMODITIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 69C are not applicable despite clear findings that the purchases were non clear findings that the purchases were non-genuine and made through shell genuine and made through shell entities merely for providing accommodation entries entities merely for providing accommodation entries 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Whether

GOLD STAR DIAMOND PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

bogus purchases by disallowing 12.5% of the disputed purchases after considering the explanation of the assessee. 11.Further careful reading of clause (c) of Explanation-1 of sub Sec. (1) of Section 263 of the Act prescribed that where any order referred in the sub section and passed by Assessing officer had been the subject matter of the any appeal after