Search: bogus purchases

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1241/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee on 13/08/2013 to 14/08/2013. During the course of survey, statement on oath of Mr. Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Director of assessee Company was recorded and during the course of statement, he accepted following purchases as bogus purchases and offered the same for taxation in respective assessment years

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1244/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee on 13/08/2013 to 14/08/2013. During the course of survey, statement on oath of Mr. Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Director of assessee Company was recorded and during the course of statement, he accepted following purchases as bogus purchases and offered the same for taxation in respective assessment years

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ASHAPURA RUBBER UDYOG,, NASHIK

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1915/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri P. S. Naik

Section 131Section 147

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ASHAPURA RUBBER UDYOG,, NASHIK

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1916/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri P. S. Naik

Section 131Section 147

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ASHAPURA RUBBER UDYOG,, NASHIK

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1917/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri P. S. Naik

Section 131Section 147

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

M/S. MARCURUS WATER TREATMENT INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX,, PUNE

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

ITA 1263/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1263/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj DandagavalFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

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

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

ITA 467/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

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

ITA 1780/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

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

ITA 1781/PUN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

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

ITA 1778/PUN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

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

ITA 1779/PUN/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

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

ITA 1782/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

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

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

ITA 932/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Adv Rahul Kaul, CA AnandFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

40,44,752 18. Similarly, for assessment year 2019-20 the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 28.03.2024 has adopted the profit @ 5% on the bogus / untested purchases of Rs.17,49,83,488/- wherein M/s. Divya Enterprises Prop. Sagar Suraj Agrawal and M/s. Khushi Traders Prop. Babusha Kasbe are appearing. The relevant details

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

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

ITA 933/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

40,44,752\n18. Similarly, for assessment year 2019-20 the Assessing Officer in the order\npassed u/s 147 r.w.s.143(3) dated 28.03.2024 has adopted the profit @ 5% on the\nbogus / untested purchases of Rs.17,49,83,488/- wherein M/s. Divya Enterprises\nProp. Sagar Suraj Agrawal and M/s. Khushi Traders Prop. Babusha Kasbe are\nappearing. The relevant details

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 213/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod JadhavFor Respondent: Shri S. Das

Section 133(6)

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

SHREYA JAYANT JOSHI,,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 47/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.47 & 48/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 41(1)

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

SHREYA JAYANT JOSHI,,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 48/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.47 & 48/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 41(1)

40. In view of the above said ratios, the present issue of bogus purchases is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. The first aspect is the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Sales Tax Department in respect of alleged hawala dealers. In many cases, the Assessing Officer has not even received the copy

SHAHAJI BHANUDAS BHAD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 816/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

section 132(4), which delineates that the statement made by the assessee may or may not be used as evidence in the assessment proceedings. The nitty gritty of the matter is that though a statement made u/s 132(4) carries immense weight and works as an evidence, but the same is not conclusive in so far as the legal assertions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHAHAJI BHANUDAS BHAD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 953/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

section 132(4), which delineates that the statement made by the assessee may or may not be used as evidence in the assessment proceedings. The nitty gritty of the matter is that though a statement made u/s 132(4) carries immense weight and works as an evidence, but the same is not conclusive in so far as the legal assertions

SHAHAJI BHANUDAS BHAD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 814/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 813 To 818/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

section 132(4), which delineates that the statement made by the assessee may or may not be used as evidence in the assessment proceedings. The nitty gritty of the matter is that though a statement made u/s 132(4) carries immense weight and works as an evidence, but the same is not conclusive in so far as the legal assertions