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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

section 144 despite the fact that all the relevant details were filed by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the estimated addition of Rs. 22.34.11.367/- on account of alleged bogus

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

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

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

bogus purchases and assessee is aggrieved by the amount of addition confirmed by the learned CIT – A and therefore both the parties are in appeal before us. 20-26 xx xx 27. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We have also considered the three-paper books submitted by the assessee containing

ITO41(2)(3),MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. NIRMIT JATIN LATHIA, 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

56,938 10. Bhakti Enterprises Bhakti Enterprises 20,37,876 20,37,876 Ashapura Enterprises / Akshad Ashapura Enterprises / Akshad 11. Enterprises Enterprises 72,37,251 72,37,251 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

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

56,938 10. Bhakti Enterprises Bhakti Enterprises 20,37,876 20,37,876 Ashapura Enterprises / Akshad Ashapura Enterprises / Akshad 11. Enterprises Enterprises 72,37,251 72,37,251 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