GOVINDBHAI TRIBHUVANDAS PATEL,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

disallowance of purchases alleged to be bogus/accommodation entries. 4 ITA No.4322/M/2023 & ors. Shri Govindbhai Tribhuvandas Patel 6. We have heard

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

bogus/accommodation entries without supplying any material. The large number of said concerns were operating from 2-3 premises owned by Mr Bhanwarlal Jain as detailed in preceding para’s of this order. During search u/s 132(1) of 1961 Act, neither books of accounts of these benami concerns were recovered from their registered premises nor any stock of diamond

SURESH L. SATYANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

bogus/accommodation entries without supplying any material. The large number of said concerns were operating from 2-3 premises owned by Mr Bhanwarlal Jain as detailed in preceding para’s of this order. During search u/s 132(1) of 1961 Act, neither books of accounts of these benami concerns were recovered from their registered premises nor any stock of diamond

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

bogus/accommodation entries and not rendered any services, therefore, it could safely be concluded that the assessee had suppressed its profits in the garb of bogus expenses booked on the basis of accommodation entries. The ld. D.R submitted that as the assessee had consciously inflated the expenses with a clear intent to reduce its taxable income/enhance the loss, therefore

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

bogus/accommodation entries and not rendered any services, therefore, it could safely be concluded that the assessee had suppressed its profits in the garb of bogus expenses booked on the basis of accommodation entries. The ld. D.R submitted that as the assessee had consciously inflated the expenses with a clear intent to reduce its taxable income/enhance the loss, therefore

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

bogus/accommodation entries and not rendered any services, therefore, it could safely be concluded that the assessee had suppressed its profits in the garb of bogus expenses booked on the basis of accommodation entries. The ld. D.R submitted that as the assessee had consciously inflated the expenses with a clear intent to reduce its taxable income/enhance the loss, therefore

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

bogus/accommodation entries and not rendered any services, therefore, it could safely be concluded that the assessee had suppressed its profits in the garb of bogus expenses booked on the basis of accommodation entries. The ld. D.R submitted that as the assessee had consciously inflated the expenses with a clear intent to reduce its taxable income/enhance the loss, therefore

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

bogus/accommodation entries and not rendered any services, therefore, it could safely be concluded that the assessee had suppressed its profits in the garb of bogus expenses booked on the basis of accommodation entries. The ld. D.R submitted that as the assessee had consciously inflated the expenses with a clear intent to reduce its taxable income/enhance the loss, therefore

ITO 11(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. REALSTONE EXPORTS LTD, THANE

In the result, the appeal of revenue as well as cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2993/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12) Ito-11(1)(2) M/S. Realstone Exports बिधम/ Room No.202, Aayakar Limited Vs. Bhavan, M. K. Marg, C-204, 2Nd Floor, Vishal Mumbai-400020. Apartments, Taki Road, Tulij, Nallasopara (E), Thane, Maharashtra- 401209. Cross Objection No. 162/Mum/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2993/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12) M/S. Realstone Exports बिधम/ Ito-11(1)(2) Limited Room No.202, Aayakar Vs. C-204, 2Nd Floor, Vishal Bhavan, M. K. Marg, Apartments, Taki Road, Mumbai-400020. Tulij, Nallasopara (E), Thane, Maharashtra- 401209. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccr8504K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri S. H. Usmani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue & Cross-Objection (Co) Of The Assessee Are Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai Dated 25.01.2017 For A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: -

bogus/accommodation entries of Rs.115,91,34,528/- shown as purchase and sales of goods with the outside parties (purchase of Rs.66,79,50,560/- and sales of Rs.49,11,84,038/-). Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who was pleased to give partial relief to the assessee by holding that 1% commission is excessive

DCIT 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRADHA TRADELINKS P. LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya () & Shri Ravish Sood () Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Shradha Tradelinks Income Tax-8(2)(1), Vs. Pvt. Ltd., 1108, Dalamal Aayakar Bhavan, Room Tower, Free Press No. 624, M.K. Road, Journal Marg, Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan No. Aafcs1489R (Assessee) (Revenue) C.O No.323/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 656/Mum/2016) (Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S Shradha Tradelinks Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax, Circle 7(2), 1108, Dalamal Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan No. Aafcs1489R (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Paresh Shaparia, A.R Revenue By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Cit D.R Date Of Hearing : 13/01/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/04/2021

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies without applying his own mind, he was not justified in invoking his jurisdiction under Sec. 147 of the Act. 14. In the backdrop of our aforesaid deliberations, we find, that in the case of the assessee before us, the A.O in his „reasons to believe‟ had merely referred to the information that was received

ITO 33(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. NEETA ASHOK SHAH, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri D. Manmohanincome Tax Officer-33(2)(4) Smt. Neeta Ashok Shah Room No. 101, 1St Floor B-602/601, Harmony Apts Vs. C-11, Prathakshakar Bhavan A.C. Road, Near Damodar Wadi Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 051 Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400101 Pan - Arkps1661E Appellant Respondent

bogus/accommodation entries and the entire transaction is nothing but accommodation entries from M/s. Alliance Intermediaries & Network Pvt. Ltd. He therefore added a sum of `2,50,843/- as unexplained cash credit. 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) wherein it was contended that the statement of Shri Mukesh Chokshi is general and assessee’s name

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. SANDEEP RAMESH SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, we dismiss both the appeal of the assessee as well of Revenue

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer- Vs. Sandeep Ramesh Shah 19(3)(1), Piramal Reshmo Mac Tools Centre Chamber, Room No.405, 2/10, Summit House, Lalbaug Forjett Hill Road, Opp Mumbai – 400 012 Bhatia Hospital, Mumbai – 400036 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafps2666B Appellant .. Respondent

bogus/accommodation entries of purchases provided by certain parties as per the information provided by the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. As per the information provided during the financial year 2010-11 the assessee had obtained the accommodation entries of purchases from the following parties: P a g e | 2 ITO-19(3)(1) Vs. Sandeep Ramesh Shah

INCOME TAX OFFICER 25(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHEETAL EXPORTS , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2987/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer-25(3)(1), बिधम/ Sheetal Exports 2Nd Floor, Room No. 233, 202 Triveni 21 Lajpatrai Vs. Kautilya Bhavan G. Block, Road, Vile Parle (W) Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400056 Bandra (E) Mumbai- 400051 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abgfs0869L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Amit C. Zaveri & Dharmil Zaveri Revenue By: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax Directing The Ao To Restrict Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter “The Act”) To The Tune Of Rs. 2,67,00,986/- From 100% To 3% Of The Bogus Purchases Made Of Rs. 2,67,00,986/-.

bogus/accommodation entries, but since the AO has accepted the sales (turn-over) of trading shown by the assessee, the entire purchases shown by assessee to the tune of Rs.2,67,00,986/- cannot be disallowed

REALSTONE EXPORTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 8(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Shaktijit Dey, Jm

bogus/accommodation entries amounting to Rs.2,79,76,16,626/- that commission income of the assessee @ 1% of these transactions was 9 ITA No.3444/Mum/2014. M/s.Realstone Exports Limited. computed at Rs. 2,79,76,166/- which was added back to the taxable income of the assessee. 5. Upon assessee’s appeal, learned CIT(A) elaborately considered the issue and confirmed the action

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR. 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008-

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd., The Acit, First Floor, Parekh Vora Circel-2(1)(1), Chambers, 66, Mumbai Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Vs. Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcc2192B (Appellant) (Respondent)

bogus/accommodation entries in order to enable the clients to claim speculative profit/loss, short term Assessment Year: 2008-09 capital gain and long term capital gain and the assessee company is one of the beneficiaries of such accommodation entries during the year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. On the basis of the said information the AO reopened the case

NARENDRA SHANTILAL BAPNA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-28(2)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarnarendra Shantilal Bapna V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Flat No. A2501, Plot No. R3 बनाम 28(2)(3) B Emerald Bay, Sector 14, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Nerul, Navi Mumbai – Station Complex, Vashi, Navi 400 706, Maharashtra Mumbai– 400703, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aclpb8458J Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

disallowed and the entire amount received back as sales proceeds on sale of shares was added under section 68 of the act. 4. In the subsequent appeal, the ld.CIT(A) upheld the addition taking into account the facts narrated in the assessment order. He observed that the assessee was unable to file any satisfactory reply to justify the logic behind

ACIT-4(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. QMAX SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

bogus/accommodation entries of loan amounting to INR.16,00,00/- from hawala companies floated by Mr. Pravin Kumar Jain. The Assessing Officer called on the Assessee to give justification for the loan transactions in the books of accounts. The Assessee submitted the following details with regard to the loans obtained: Sr. No. Name of the concern controlled and managed by Shri

SALONI GIRRAJKISHOR AGRAWAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 25(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarsaloni Girrajkishor Agrawal V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1601/1602, Green Acre, बनाम –25(1)(1),Kautilya Bhavan, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri Bandra Kurla Complex, (West), Mumbai – 400 053, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Anupa1692D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

disallowance of the claim of LTCG on sale of shares of ESL. It is contended that the assessee is a regular investor in shares. It submitted before the AO, copies of the preferential allotment letter for purchase of shares, contract notes for sales, demat account statements showing holding period more than 12 months, bank statements evidencing receipt of sale proceeds