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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

losses pertain. 020. Assessee approached the learned CIT – A wherein he confirmed the disallowance of estimated addition of ₹ 506,455,949/– on account of alleged bogus purchases and a further addition of ₹ 36,845,487/– a on account of alleged bogus purchases made from is 6 different parties who are bogus suppliers. However the learned CIT – A deleted the addition

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

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

losses. 3.58 Considering the facts of the case, additional profits @ 2% to 3% of the revised turnover of sales (after allowing due relief in respect of bogus sales) may be added to the taxable income of the assessee over and above what has already been declared.” 20. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, vehemently argued the issue in light

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

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

losses. 3.58 Considering the facts of the case, additional profits @ 2% to 3% of the revised turnover of sales (after allowing due relief in respect of bogus sales) may be added to the taxable income of the assessee over and above what has already been declared.” 20. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, vehemently argued the issue in light

PURNA PURSHOTTAM EXPORTS ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 32(2)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Purna Pushottam Exports, Ito-32(3)(5), Gala No. 329, Vardhman Mumbai. Vs. Industrial Estate, Behind Petrol Pump, S.V. Road, Dahisar East, Mumbai-400068. Pan No. Aaefp 8085 E Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2018-19 Purna Pushottam Exports, Acit Central Circle, 2(2), Gala No. 329, Vardhman Mumbai. Vs. Industrial Estate, Behind Petrol Pump, S.V. Road, Dahisar East, Mumbai-400068. Pan No. Aaefp 8085 E Appellant Respondent

bogus purchases is sustained. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are accordingly partly allowed. assessee are accordingly partly allowed. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2018-19. The grounds raised

PURNA PURSHOTTAM EXPORTS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE,2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Purna Pushottam Exports, Ito-32(3)(5), Gala No. 329, Vardhman Mumbai. Vs. Industrial Estate, Behind Petrol Pump, S.V. Road, Dahisar East, Mumbai-400068. Pan No. Aaefp 8085 E Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2018-19 Purna Pushottam Exports, Acit Central Circle, 2(2), Gala No. 329, Vardhman Mumbai. Vs. Industrial Estate, Behind Petrol Pump, S.V. Road, Dahisar East, Mumbai-400068. Pan No. Aaefp 8085 E Appellant Respondent

bogus purchases is sustained. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are accordingly partly allowed. assessee are accordingly partly allowed. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2018-19. The grounds raised

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SKYWAY INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, whereas appeals of the revenue are par...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

bogus long term additions made on account of bogus long term additions made on account of bogus long term capital gain on the ground that the evidences capital gain on the ground that the evidences capital gain on the ground that the evidences found during search at the premises of entry found during search at the premises of entry found

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. In absence of . In absence of complete details provided, provided, the Assessing Officer is justified in the Assessing Officer is justified in making estimated disallowance disallowance @ 10% of total expenses on tyre of total expenses on tyre purchase. Accordingly, we uphold the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on . Accordingly, we uphold the finding

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI , PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. In absence of . In absence of complete details provided, provided, the Assessing Officer is justified in the Assessing Officer is justified in making estimated disallowance disallowance @ 10% of total expenses on tyre of total expenses on tyre purchase. Accordingly, we uphold the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on . Accordingly, we uphold the finding

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. In absence of . In absence of complete details provided, provided, the Assessing Officer is justified in the Assessing Officer is justified in making estimated disallowance disallowance @ 10% of total expenses on tyre of total expenses on tyre purchase. Accordingly, we uphold the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on . Accordingly, we uphold the finding

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

bogus. In absence of . In absence of complete details provided, provided, the Assessing Officer is justified in the Assessing Officer is justified in making estimated disallowance disallowance @ 10% of total expenses on tyre of total expenses on tyre purchase. Accordingly, we uphold the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on . Accordingly, we uphold the finding