Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax Central 3 vs Itd Cementation India Ltd on 19 November, 2025

Author: M.S. Sonak

Bench: M.S. Sonak

           Digitally signed
           by PALLAVI
PALLAVI    MAHENDRA
MAHENDRA   WARGAONKAR
WARGAONKAR Date:                                                            9-IXTA-1163-2024.DOCX
           2025.11.20
           17:02:04 +0530

                                                                                                      Pallavi


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                                           INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1163 OF 2024

                              Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-Central 3  ...Appellant
                                    Versus
                              ITD Cementation India Ltd.                ...Respondent
                               ______________________________________________________
                              Mr. Suresh Kumar, for Appellant.
                              ______________________________________________________


                                                         CORAM : M.S. Sonak &
                                                                 Advait M. Sethna, JJ.

DATED : 19 November 2025 P.C.:-

1. Heard Mr Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the Appellant.
2. Mr Suresh Kumar submits that though the tax effect is less than Rs.2 Crores this is a case of bogus purchases and therefore, the same falls within the exceptions carved out in the CBDT Circular. He further submits that similar Appeals have been admitted by this Court.
3. Accordingly, we admit this Appeal on the following substantial questions of law:-
"(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.5,03,178/- under section 14A as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) while computing the total income under normal provision as well as Book Page 1 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 20/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 20/11/2025 20:59:48 ::: 9-IXTA-1163-2024.DOCX profits under section 115JB of the Act?
(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in holding that the out of the total bogus purchases of Rs.30,67,002/- only 12.5% of bogus purchases may be confirmed being profit element in bogus purchases while the assessee failed to substantiate the claim of purchase with evidence?"

4. The other questions formulated in the paragraph 4 of the Appeal Memo stands subsumed by the above two questions.

5. The Appellant will have to take immediate steps to serve the Respondents and file affidavit of service.

(Advait M. Sethna, J) (M.S. Sonak, J.) Page 2 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 20/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 20/11/2025 20:59:48 :::