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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

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

iv) improbably less time shown for loading huge quantities of cement bags, (v) the same persons handwriting being found on the lorry receipts of various transporters who are based at different stations, (vi) the same telephone nos. being found on the transport bills of different transporters, etc. Similar discrepancies were also noted at the time of the search action. These

NAVNIDHI STEEL AND ENGG CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

iv) It means that Bhanwarlal Jain Group companies are providing only accommodation entries and no genuine transactions. In the light of the above facts, the Ld. Assessing Officer treated the amount of Rs.25 lakhs taken as loans/advances as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 2.2. On appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), the factual matrix

ACIT -3(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HIKAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the In the result, the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2010

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit-3(1)(2), Hikal Ltd., Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, 717/718, Maker Chambers V, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaach 0383 A Appellant Respondent : Revenue By Mr. Sanjay Vishwas Rao Deshmukh, Cit-Dr/ Mr. R.N. D’Souza, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Ar : Date Of Hearing 02/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/12/2022

section (4) of section 10A section 10A, relied upon by the Assessing Officer, apply for the purpose of upon by the Assessing Officer, apply for the purpose of upon by the Assessing Officer, apply for the purpose of segregating the profits of the busin segregating the profits of the business into export profits and ess into export profits and domestic

HEMAL MAGANLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalhemal Maganlal Shah 84, 4Th Floor, Pankaj-B, Lbs Road, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai-400086. Pan: Amfps8271G ...... Appellant Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. H.M. Shah Respondent By : Sh. Prasoon Kabra Date Of Hearing : 17/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/08/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

iv) We have gone through the provisions of section 69C of the Act which deals with the situation where assessee incurs any expenditure but not able to explain the source of the expenditure or the explanation offered by assessee is not acceptable to the AO. In the impugned matter there is no question arose about the source of the purchases

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

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

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

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

iv. xx xx 17. As already stated, learned CIT – A passed a consolidated order for assessment year 2014–15 to assessment year 2020–21. The effect of the above order is as under: assessment addition made by the AO addition year on account of bogus confirmed by the purchases learned

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

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

iv. xx xx 17. As already stated, learned CIT – A passed a consolidated order for assessment year 2014–15 to assessment year 2020–21. The effect of the above order is as under: assessment addition made by the AO addition year on account of bogus confirmed by the purchases learned