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

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

CHETAN RAJNIKANT SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-24(1)(4), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Soodchetan Rajnikant Shah Income Tax Officer-24(1)-4, 703, Jamuna Vihar, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Juhu Lane, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400058 Pan – Amqps6037D (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceedings in the absence of anything to show that the A.O had independently applied his mind to arrive at a belief that income has escaped assessment. Also in the case of CIT Vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. & Ors. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Del), it was observed by the High Court that where the A.O had acted mechanically

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

entries. After deliberating on the facts, it was inter alia observed by the Hon‟ble High Court that a mere reference to the information received from the Dy. Director of IT (Inv.) cannot constitute valid reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings in the absence of anything to show that the A.O had independently applied his mind to arrive at a belief

SHRIKANT FINCONSERY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-4, MUMBAI

In the result, all three appeals preferred by the Appellant are allowed

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information that the Appellant had received bogus/accommodation entries in respect of loan

SHRIKANT FINCONSERV PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-4, MUMBAI

In the result, all three appeals preferred by the Appellant are allowed

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information that the Appellant had received bogus/accommodation entries in respect of loan

NIKHIL ASHOK SHIVDIKAR,PAREL MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 20 2 4 MUMBAI , LALBAUG PAREL

Bench: him.

reassessment under Section 147 of the Act for the reasons that the Assessing Officer received certain information from the Director General of Income-tax (Investigation), Kolkatta about penny stock companies; and that the Assessee was one of the beneficiaries who has availed such bogus/accommodation entry

SIRONA DENTAL SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

reassessment under Section 147 of the Act for the reasons that the Assessing Officer received certain information from the Director General of Income-tax (Investigation), Kolkatta about penny stock companies; and that the Assessee was one of the beneficiaries who has availed such bogus/accommodation entry

MR NILESH BHARANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 612/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

bogus/accommodation entry. From the information received from Deputy Directorate of Investigation, Unit-5(4), Mumbai, it is seen that an amount of Rs.56,86,529/- has been reflected under the head of Penny Stock transaction for the year under consideration. 3. Further, information has also been received that Shri Jagdish T. Ramani, Ashwin Rathod, Vibha Sachin Rawate and Shankar Jadhav

ITO-24(3)(1),MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI vs. RAMA RAJIV JAGDALE, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

reassessment on the basis of investigation by the DDIT (Inv.), Kolkata. In the course of assessment, Ld. Assessing Officer called for details and explanations in respect of the transaction of sale of shares on which exemption has been claimed under section 10(38) on account of long-term capital gain earned by the assessee. To corroborate the facts, assessee furnished

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. QMAX SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit-4(3)(1) Vs. M/S Qmax Synthetics R. No. 649, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., 5-B/174, Aayakar Bhavan, Sanjay Building, Mittal Mumbai – 400 020 Industrial Estate, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacq0206D Respondent .. Appellant

bogus/accommodation entries on loan of Rs.1,64,00,000/- from the following 7 parties related to Shri Pravin Kumar Jain as under: Sr. Name of the concern Amount(Rs.) Interest (Rs.) No. 1. Casper Enterprises P. Ltd. 24,00,000 14,597 (Ostwal Trading (I) P. Ltd.) 2. Duke Business P. Ltd. (JPK 20,00,000 28,932 Trading

SWASTIK REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T.15(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

bogus/accommodation entries. From the facts found by the authorities, it was clear that the amount of loan was advanced through the account payee cheques and PANs were also furnished. The amount has been repaid through account payee cheques and the lenders has sufficient funds in their bank accounts not by cash deposited on the preceding date or when the cheques

SWASTIK REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 15(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

bogus/accommodation entries. From the facts found by the authorities, it was clear that the amount of loan was advanced through the account payee cheques and PANs were also furnished. The amount has been repaid through account payee cheques and the lenders has sufficient funds in their bank accounts not by cash deposited on the preceding date or when the cheques

DANCO ENTERPRISES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for stati...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

bogus/accommodation Danco Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd. Danco Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 5022 & 5023/MUM/2024 entry from ‘One World One World group’ concern of bogu concern of bogus purchases amounting to Rs.9,37,20,787/ amounting to Rs.9,37,20,787/- in the period relevant to the in the period relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Accordingly, the Assessing