SHRI ANAND M GUPTA,LUCKNOW vs. ITO - 15(1)(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleestate Of Shri Anand M. Gupta V. Income Tax Officer – 15(1)(4) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road {Through Legal Heir Mumbai - 400020 Mrs. Madhu Anand Gupta} B-723, Sector – C Mahanagar, Lucknow – 226006 Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aabae8078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Malav Sheth Shri Ashish Kumar Department Represented By :

bogus capital gains from transaction of sale and purchase of shares of S Investment and Consultancy Limited which was penny stock company and pre-dated contract notes were issued by the brokers to manipulate and introduce long-term capital gains in favour of the assessee, therefore, the said capital gains were added under section 68 as unexplained cash credits

DY CIT -14(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AYG REALTY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result there is no cause of grievance made out by the assessee on which this tribunal can adjudicate hence, challenging the initiation itself is not allowed hence, found to be infructuous

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyaldy.Cit-14(1)(1), Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. ..... Appellant Vs. M/S Ayg Realty Ltd., No. 1, Rajkamal, Cst Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400098. Pan: Aaacc4637J ...... Respondent Choudhury & Choudhury India Ltd. (Now Known As Ayg Realty Pvt. Ltd.), No. 1, Rajkamal, Cst Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400098. Pan: Aaacc4637J ...... Appellant Vs. The Cit (Appeals)-22, Room No. 513, 5Th Floor, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ..... Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Firoz Andhyarujina & Sh. Manek Andhyarujina Revenue By : Sh. Mehul Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2022

bogus bills. In view of all these facts, the addition made by the AO amounting to Rs.1,12,41,367/- being 20% of outstanding balance of sundry creditors for material purchased and Rs.3,02,46,494/- being 20% of outstanding balance of Sundry Creditors for Expenditure cannot be sustained and the entire addition of Rs.4,14,87,861/- done

CHOUDHURY & CHOUDHURY INDIA LTD. ( NOW KNOWN AS AYG REALTY P. LTD.),MUMBAI vs. CIT (APPEAL)-22, MUMBAI

In the result there is no cause of grievance made out by the assessee on which this tribunal can adjudicate hence, challenging the initiation itself is not allowed hence, found to be infructuous

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyaldy.Cit-14(1)(1), Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. ..... Appellant Vs. M/S Ayg Realty Ltd., No. 1, Rajkamal, Cst Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400098. Pan: Aaacc4637J ...... Respondent Choudhury & Choudhury India Ltd. (Now Known As Ayg Realty Pvt. Ltd.), No. 1, Rajkamal, Cst Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400098. Pan: Aaacc4637J ...... Appellant Vs. The Cit (Appeals)-22, Room No. 513, 5Th Floor, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ..... Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Firoz Andhyarujina & Sh. Manek Andhyarujina Revenue By : Sh. Mehul Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2022

bogus bills. In view of all these facts, the addition made by the AO amounting to Rs.1,12,41,367/- being 20% of outstanding balance of sundry creditors for material purchased and Rs.3,02,46,494/- being 20% of outstanding balance of Sundry Creditors for Expenditure cannot be sustained and the entire addition of Rs.4,14,87,861/- done

DT INTERIORS PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO -12(2)(4), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

bogus expenditure on account of purchases made by the appellant from five parties. (ii) Without prejudice to what has been stated above, CIT(A) ought to have restricted disallowance to 8% of Rs.1,20,69,194/- as has been done by him while considering grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12. b) CIT(A) ought to have deleted addition