INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. DELUXE TUBE TRADERS & SCRAP CENTRE,, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

144 of the Act, made the entire addition of bogus purchases amounting to Rs.18,50,403/- to the total income of the assessee and determined the income at Rs.21,05,200/-. 5. In the First Appellate Proceedings, the assessee questioned the addition of entire bogus purchases made by the assessee for the assessment years under consideration. Assessee also raised

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. RATHI STEEL AND METAL PVT. LTD, JALNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Dcit, Aurangabad Rathi Steel & Metal Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.F12, Addl Midc Area, Phase-Ii, Vs. Jalna – 431203 Pan : Aabcr5546A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anand Partani Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari - Cit Date Of Hearing : 01-04-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 O R D E R

section 271AAB of the IT Act, 1961 are initiated herewith. (Addition Rs.17,42,770/-)” 6. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted both the additions made by the Assessing Officer. So far as the addition on account of bogus purchases is concerned, he deleted the same by observing as under: 8 “5.2 I have gone through the submission

ABDUL REHMAN ABDUL RAUF CHOUDHARY,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 9(1),, PUNE

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

144 r.w.s. 148 of the Act and added the addition of Rs.19,00,418/- for the assessment year 2010-11 and Rs.19,14,422/- for the assessment year 2011-12 on account of bogus purchase to the total income of the assessee respectively. Aggrieved with the said decision of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before

ABDUL REHMAN ABDUL RAUF CHOUDHARY,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 9(1),, PUNE

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

144 r.w.s. 148 of the Act and added the addition of Rs.19,00,418/- for the assessment year 2010-11 and Rs.19,14,422/- for the assessment year 2011-12 on account of bogus purchase to the total income of the assessee respectively. Aggrieved with the said decision of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI AKSHAY RAJESH SAMDARIYA,, JALNA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue and the Cross Objections

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2076/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

section 144 r.w.s. 147 made addition of the entire amount held to be bogus purchases. Aggrieved against the assessment order

M/S. TIRUPATI SALES,,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

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

144 r.w.s. 148 of the Act and added the addition of Rs.1,30,86,345/- for the assessment year 2009-10 and Rs.1,61,84,077/- for the assessment year 2010-11 on account of bogus purchases to the total income of the assessee respectively. Aggrieved with the said decision of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before

M/S. TIRUPATI SALES,,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

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

144 r.w.s. 148 of the Act and added the addition of Rs.1,30,86,345/- for the assessment year 2009-10 and Rs.1,61,84,077/- for the assessment year 2010-11 on account of bogus purchases to the total income of the assessee respectively. Aggrieved with the said decision of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. KEVAL KADU DEORE,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

144 of the Act vide order dt. 25.03.2015 and the total income was determined at Rs.1,71,93,354/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.29.06.2016 granted partial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee and Revenue are now in appeal before

KEVAL KADU DEORE,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

144 of the Act vide order dt. 25.03.2015 and the total income was determined at Rs.1,71,93,354/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.29.06.2016 granted partial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee and Revenue are now in appeal before

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. ANIL JAIRAM GOEL, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

section 68 and 69C of the Act. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, when the appellate authority has categorically found that the alleged purchases are bogus in nature, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in restricting the profit margin to 12.5%. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any grounds

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. ANIL JAIRAM GOEL, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

section 68 and 69C of the Act. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, when the appellate authority has categorically found that the alleged purchases are bogus in nature, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in restricting the profit margin to 12.5%. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any grounds

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK vs. TAPARIA TOOLS LIMITED, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as per the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1337/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

144/- ₹6,62,168 0.07% M/s. Sharp Kind Trading ₹92,54,79,714 ₹3,05,591 0.03% M/s. Someshwar enterprise Pvt. Ltd. ₹24,36,33,533 ₹1,68,362 0.069% M/s. Anuradha Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. ₹7,81,80,000 ₹3,16,000 0.4% M/s. Ferrum Alloys Pvt. Ltd. ₹9,89,98,584 ₹10,98,357 1.1% M/s. Accurate Metal Corporation

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14 (3),, PUNE vs. JEEVAN POPATLAL BHALIYA, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

bogus, which will nullify the effect in profit and loss account.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of civil construction. He is working with various builders for last 20 years or so. The assessee had filed the return of income on 24-3-2010 declaring total income

M/S. SHIVAM CONSTRUCTION CO,,PANVEL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

Appeals are dismissed, accordingly

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.233 & 234/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12

144 r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short the “Act”. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. A.Y: 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Shivam Construction Co., 2. The assessee’s identical sole substantive ground raised in both these appeals challenges correctness of the lower authorities action disallowing its purchases of Rs.32,04,837/- and Rs.16,27,002/-; respectively

M/S. SHIVAM CONSTRUCTION CO,,PANVEL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

Appeals are dismissed, accordingly

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.233 & 234/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12

144 r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short the “Act”. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. A.Y: 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Shivam Construction Co., 2. The assessee’s identical sole substantive ground raised in both these appeals challenges correctness of the lower authorities action disallowing its purchases of Rs.32,04,837/- and Rs.16,27,002/-; respectively

DILAWAR SHAIKH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.933 To 935/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 Dilawar Shaikh, Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Super Profiles Pvt. Ltd., 13-A, Parvati Industrial Estate, Pune – Satara Road, Pune-411026. Pan : Aljps3300F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. D. Pathak Revenue By : Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.07.2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessees Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Commonly Dated 23.032018 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.933/Pun/2018 For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Are Stated Herein.

144 of the Act at total income of Rs.3,24,23,170/- after making addition on account of alleged bogus purchase of Rs.3,02,85,190/-. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) who had confirmed the addition. However, on further appeal before the ITAT, Pune Benches vide order dated 31.08.2017 in ITA No.1832

DILAWAR SHAIKH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.933 To 935/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 Dilawar Shaikh, Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Super Profiles Pvt. Ltd., 13-A, Parvati Industrial Estate, Pune – Satara Road, Pune-411026. Pan : Aljps3300F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. D. Pathak Revenue By : Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.07.2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessees Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Commonly Dated 23.032018 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.933/Pun/2018 For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Are Stated Herein.

144 of the Act at total income of Rs.3,24,23,170/- after making addition on account of alleged bogus purchase of Rs.3,02,85,190/-. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) who had confirmed the addition. However, on further appeal before the ITAT, Pune Benches vide order dated 31.08.2017 in ITA No.1832

DILAWAR SHAIKH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.933 To 935/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2011-12 Dilawar Shaikh, Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Super Profiles Pvt. Ltd., 13-A, Parvati Industrial Estate, Pune – Satara Road, Pune-411026. Pan : Aljps3300F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. D. Pathak Revenue By : Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.07.2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessees Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Commonly Dated 23.032018 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.933/Pun/2018 For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Are Stated Herein.

144 of the Act at total income of Rs.3,24,23,170/- after making addition on account of alleged bogus purchase of Rs.3,02,85,190/-. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) who had confirmed the addition. However, on further appeal before the ITAT, Pune Benches vide order dated 31.08.2017 in ITA No.1832