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

25% of the purchases made by the assessee for the year under consideration is not based on facts and the same is unsustainable when the books of accounts are not formally rejected u/s.145(3) of the Act. Further, he submitted for restricting the addition to 10% of the alleged bogus purchases. For this proposition, he relied on the decision

PRAMOD SHANKARRAO SALUNKHE,,KOLHAPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -2,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 974/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Pramod Shankarrao Salunkhe Flat No.7, Takshak Apartment, E Ward, Nagala Park, Kolhapur-416 003 Pan : Alnps2900F .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Kolhapur. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri J.P Chandrakar

25% of bogus purchases goes against the principle of Section 68 and 69C of the I.T Act, 1961”. The said

INCOME TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. MAHARASHTRA INDUSTRIES & RE-ROLLING MILLS,, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

Section of Sales Tax Department, AO issued notice u/s.148 of the Act to the assessee on 26-09-2013 on finding that the assessee made Hawala purchases to the tune of Rs.14,63,641/-. In response to the same, assessee filed revised return on 13-03-2015 declaring income of Rs.15,86,840/-. Assessee has shown net profit

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, AURANGABAD vs. METAROLLS ISPAT PVT. LTD, JALNA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

bogus purchases of Rs.13,80,63,994/- will meet the ends of justice. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to adopt the profit rate of 5% on the total purchases of Rs.13,80,63,994/- and restrict the addition to Rs.69,03,200/-. The order

M/S. SIZE CONTROL GAUGES AND TOOLS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1778 To 1782/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2011-12 M/S. Size Control Gauges & Tools Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.100/101, Tiny Industries Co-Op. Estate Ltd., Pisoli Road, Kondhwa(Bk), Pune – 411 048. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaccs3670F

section 143(2) after filing the return of income which had rendered the Assessment Order bad in law liable to be set aside. 3. The CIT(A) erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs.20,31,158/- out of purchases though the purchases were fully verifiable and the payments were made through bank. 4. Without prejudice to Ground

M/S. SIZE CONTROL GAUGES AND TOOLS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1778 To 1782/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2011-12 M/S. Size Control Gauges & Tools Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.100/101, Tiny Industries Co-Op. Estate Ltd., Pisoli Road, Kondhwa(Bk), Pune – 411 048. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaccs3670F

section 143(2) after filing the return of income which had rendered the Assessment Order bad in law liable to be set aside. 3. The CIT(A) erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs.20,31,158/- out of purchases though the purchases were fully verifiable and the payments were made through bank. 4. Without prejudice to Ground

M/S. SIZE CONTROL GAUGES AND TOOLS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1778 To 1782/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2011-12 M/S. Size Control Gauges & Tools Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.100/101, Tiny Industries Co-Op. Estate Ltd., Pisoli Road, Kondhwa(Bk), Pune – 411 048. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaccs3670F

section 143(2) after filing the return of income which had rendered the Assessment Order bad in law liable to be set aside. 3. The CIT(A) erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs.20,31,158/- out of purchases though the purchases were fully verifiable and the payments were made through bank. 4. Without prejudice to Ground

M/S. SIZE CONTROL GAUGES AND TOOLS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1778 To 1782/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2011-12 M/S. Size Control Gauges & Tools Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.100/101, Tiny Industries Co-Op. Estate Ltd., Pisoli Road, Kondhwa(Bk), Pune – 411 048. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaccs3670F

section 143(2) after filing the return of income which had rendered the Assessment Order bad in law liable to be set aside. 3. The CIT(A) erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs.20,31,158/- out of purchases though the purchases were fully verifiable and the payments were made through bank. 4. Without prejudice to Ground

M/S. SIZE CONTROL GAUGES AND TOOLS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1778 To 1782/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2011-12 M/S. Size Control Gauges & Tools Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.100/101, Tiny Industries Co-Op. Estate Ltd., Pisoli Road, Kondhwa(Bk), Pune – 411 048. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaccs3670F

section 143(2) after filing the return of income which had rendered the Assessment Order bad in law liable to be set aside. 3. The CIT(A) erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs.20,31,158/- out of purchases though the purchases were fully verifiable and the payments were made through bank. 4. Without prejudice to Ground

M/S. ANIKET TRADING COMPANY,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.467/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

25-05-2018. 5 M/s. Aniket Trading Company 4.2 Referring to the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Chhabi Electricals Pvt. Ltd. (supra), Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s case falls in clause (iv) of the classification given by the Tribunal in the said case

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. DEBROS POLYMER PRODUCT,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

25% of the bogus purchases by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). A perusal of the assessment order shows that the Assessing Officer has made addition merely on the basis of the information received from Sales Tax Department without taking into consideration the fact that the assessee has disclosed the sale of manufactured items. The assessee has furnished trail

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. DEBROS POLYMER PRODUCT,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

25% of the bogus purchases by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). A perusal of the assessment order shows that the Assessing Officer has made addition merely on the basis of the information received from Sales Tax Department without taking into consideration the fact that the assessee has disclosed the sale of manufactured items. The assessee has furnished trail

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. DEBROS POLYMER PRODUCT,, NASHIK

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

25% of the bogus purchases by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). A perusal of the assessment order shows that the Assessing Officer has made addition merely on the basis of the information received from Sales Tax Department without taking into consideration the fact that the assessee has disclosed the sale of manufactured items. The assessee has furnished trail

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

25% of alleged bogus purchases. We find that on identical facts in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2010-11, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal by following the decision in the case of Chhabi Electricals (supra) has restricted the disallowance to 10% of the hawala purchases by observing as under : “12. The case of assessee 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

25% of alleged bogus purchases. We find that on identical facts in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2010-11, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal by following the decision in the case of Chhabi Electricals (supra) has restricted the disallowance to 10% of the hawala purchases by observing as under : “12. The case of assessee before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. METAROLLS ISPAT PVT. LTD., JALNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

bogus purchases of Rs.13,80,63,994/- will meet the ends of justice. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to adopt the profit rate of 5% on the total purchases of Rs.13,80,63,994/- and restrict the addition to Rs.69,03,200/-. The order

BHISE INTERNATIONAL AUTO INDUSTRIES,,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2913/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bhise International Auto Industries, Plot No.7, Bhise Bungalow, Bhadrapad, Near Ambad Police Station Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422010 …. Pan: Aaifb8245Q Vs.

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 2 Bhise International Auto Industries 1) The Hon. CIT (A) was not right in restricting the disallowance of alleged Hawala purchases instead of granting 100% relief: The Hon. CIT (A) in first appeal has allowed a partial

SOFTCON SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

25,000/- was added to the total income of the assessee. 4. During First Appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer as per reasons appearing in his order on record specifically opining that the Representative of the assessee has accepted the disallowance and offered to pay tax being confronted on this 3 A.Y.2010-11