DCIT-14(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S TITAN LABORATORIES PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

bogus purchases. Ground raised by the assessee on this issue is partly allowed. 9. The second grounds of appeal of the assessee is in respect of sustaining the action of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the claim for deduction u/s. 35(2AB) of the Act. 10. Briefly stated the facts are that, the Assessing Officer in the course

BRIDGE INDIA FUND,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INT TAX) CIRCLE-1(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 457/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus purchase of share is chargeable to tax under section 69 of The Income Tax Act. Further sum of ₹ 4,711,806 is an alleged commission paid at the rate of 3% on obtaining the total purchase transaction of the above company chargeable to tax under section 69C of the act. Accordingly the draft assessment order was passed

BRIDGE INDIA FUND,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INT TAX) CIRCLE-1(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 457/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus purchase of share is chargeable to tax under section 69 of The Income Tax Act. Further sum of ₹ 4,711,806 is an alleged commission paid at the rate of 3% on obtaining the total purchase transaction of the above company chargeable to tax under section 69C of the act. Accordingly the draft assessment order was passed

IQBAL AHMED KHALILAMED SUBEDAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(2), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2135/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4896/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09)

bogus purchases.The learned DR also relied upon decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of P M Abdulla (supra) wherein the Hon‟ble Court held that in case of a trader Section 68 and 69C would be squarely applicable to sundry creditors as credit purchases are nothing but expenditure and if the sundry creditors

IQBAL AHMAED KHALIL AHMED SUBEDAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2135/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4896/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09)

bogus purchases.The learned DR also relied upon decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of P M Abdulla (supra) wherein the Hon‟ble Court held that in case of a trader Section 68 and 69C would be squarely applicable to sundry creditors as credit purchases are nothing but expenditure and if the sundry creditors

RAVINDRA K. RESHAWALA,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMM. OF INCOME TAX 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleravindra K. Reshamwala V. Dcit- Circle 17(1) 7/A Pil Court, 111 M.K. Road Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 Churchgate, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaafr2227C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Piyush Chhajed & Shri Sumit Mantri Department Represented By : Shri. Saurabh Kumar Rai

Section 35AC The Trustee accepted that all the expenses were bogus and the donations received in cheques were returned in cash to all the donors after deducting nominal commission. Consequently, Survey Action conducted by the Investigation wing on some of the donors have conclusively proved that the Trust indeed returned by donations in cash," 4. During scrutiny proceedings, authorised representative

ASHUTOSH SINHA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

purchase consideration paid by the assessee is liable to be taxed under the head ‘income from other sources.’. The ld. AO however, had also noted that as per the request of the assessee, reference was made to the DVO for the valuation of the property, however, the assessment was getting time barred on 31/03/2022 and the valuation report