RAHUL CABLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1168 To 1170/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

bogus purchases. The total of such purchases works out to Rs.3,47,78,546/- for the A.Y. 2009-10. As per procedure laid down in the provisions of section

RAHUL CABLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1168 To 1170/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

bogus purchases. The total of such purchases works out to Rs.3,47,78,546/- for the A.Y. 2009-10. As per procedure laid down in the provisions of section

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

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

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

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

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

47,771 45,44,599 2,97,92,370 Babusha Kasbe 6 Raja Cement House 1,99,46,143 35,90,308 2,35,36,451 Total 17,49,83,488 3,14,97,032 20,64,80,520 19. However, we find the Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment order, has made the entire addition of bogus / untested purchases

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

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

47,771\n45,44,599\n2,97,92,370\n6\nRaja Cement House\n1,99,46,143\n35,90,308\n2,35,36,451\nTotal\n17,49,83,488\n3,14,97,032\n20,64,80,520\n19. However, we find the Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment order,\nhas made the entire addition of bogus / untested purchases and these

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

bogus purchases from various entities in respect of the assessee company. In the appraisal report names of 19 parties were mentioned. Notices u/s 133(6) of the Act were issued to these parties and the purchases were confirmed by the parties except OM Traders, Sunny Traders and Krypton Scrap Works Pvt. Ltd. It was further mentioned that information was also

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHAPUR vs. NATHMAL RUPCHAND JAIN, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

bogus purchase entries from M/s. Rishabh Trading Company, which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC had admitted therefore, without appreciating the facts properly the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC was not justified in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A. He accordingly submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC be reversed and that of the Assessing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

section 133(6) of the Act, where hawala dealer was not traceable and in the absence of the assessee failing to file any documentary evidence of delivery of 18 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 goods, addition is to be upheld in the hands of assessee on account of such bogus purchases. IV. The next

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

section 133(6) of the Act, where hawala dealer was not traceable and in the absence of the assessee failing to file any documentary evidence of delivery of 18 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 goods, addition is to be upheld in the hands of assessee on account of such bogus purchases. IV. The next

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

section 133(6) of the Act, where hawala dealer was not traceable and in the absence of the assessee failing to file any documentary evidence of delivery of 18 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 goods, addition is to be upheld in the hands of assessee on account of such bogus purchases. IV. The next

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

section 133(6) of the Act, where hawala dealer was not traceable and in the absence of the assessee failing to file any documentary evidence of delivery of 18 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 goods, addition is to be upheld in the hands of assessee on account of such bogus purchases. IV. The next

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

LEEBA CONSTRUCTION,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

47,828/- made from one alleged hawala party, M/s. Ceeport Iron & Steel Ltd. and thereby levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the, ground that the entire amount of said purchases were offered to tax by the assessee in the course of asst. proceedings. 4. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the purchases made from the said party

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1997/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Keval Kadu Deore, Plot No.4, Shiv Parvati Bunglow, Pumping Station Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422013 …. Pan: Adnpd3164C Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Nashik

47 of appellate order, it is further observed that the parties from whom purchases were made were not produced either before the Assessing Officer or before the CIT(A) but the Assessing Officer had not 5 Shri Keval Kadu Deore brought any evidence on record to prove that purchases were bogus except relied on information received from Sales Tax Department

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. SURYACHANDRA LALMANI DUBEY, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.36,56,250/- and suppressed the gross profit for the year under consideration………………… Therefore, 1 have reasons to believe that for A.Y. 2014-15, income to the tune of Rs.36,56,250/-has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147” 5.3 Thus, it can be observed from the above part of the paragraphs

RAVINDRA DADA PAIL,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.2881/Pun/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Ravindra Dada Patil, The Acit, Circle-2, Flat No.607/608, Signature Vs Kolhapur. Apartment, Serene Meadow, . Anandwali, Nashik. Pan: Addpp 4442 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Kolhapur’S Order Dated 14.11.2017 Passed In Case No.Kop/267/2016- 17, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

bogus long term capital gains. He appears to have considered modus-operandi employed in such dubious sale purchase transactions in shares to conclude that the assessee’s impugned claim under section 10(38) of the Act lacked genuineness. We note in this factual backdrop that this tribunal’s recent co-ordinate bench’s order in ITA No.1849/PUN/2018 Smt.Beena Shammi Chaudhary

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - ICHALKRANJI, ICHALKRANJI vs. MANISHA RAJENDRA SHETE,, KOLHAPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Nilawati Neminath Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8442 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.665/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Niranjan Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Botps 0314 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.666/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Manisha Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8514 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shr Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022

purchase and sale of shares resulting in L TCG. These evidences were neither found by the Id AO to be false or fabricated. The facts of the case and the evidences in support of the assessee's case clearly support the claim of the assessee that the transactions of the assessee were bona fide and genuine and therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ICHALKARANJI CIRCLE,, ICHALKARANJI vs. NILAWATI NEMINATH SHETE,, KOLHAPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Nilawati Neminath Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8442 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.665/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Niranjan Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Botps 0314 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.666/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Manisha Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8514 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shr Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022

purchase and sale of shares resulting in L TCG. These evidences were neither found by the Id AO to be false or fabricated. The facts of the case and the evidences in support of the assessee's case clearly support the claim of the assessee that the transactions of the assessee were bona fide and genuine and therefore