Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : DCIT Vs Amar Ghanasingh (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2013-14
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
DCIT Vs Amar Ghanasingh (ITAT Mumbai) Entire Purchase Can’t Be Disallowed When Sales Are Accepted—Only 3% Profit Element to Be Taxed on Bogus Purchases—ITAT Mumbai Follows Consistency Rule The Revenue filed appeal against the order of NFAC (CIT(A)) dated 13.06.2025 for AY 2013-14 where relief had been granted to M/s Amar Ghanasingh, a jewellery manufacturer & trader. During scrutiny, AO alleged that the Assessee had made purchases of ₹ 9.40 crore from five entities linked with the Bhanwarlal Jain Group—identified as accommodation entry providers. Holding these to be non-genuine, ...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Delay Condoned with Cost: ITAT Grants Fresh Chance, Slams Non-Compliance Section 153C Valid but Addition Fails: No Incriminating Material = No Deemed Dividend 870-Day Delay Not Condoned: ITAT Refuses Relief, Calls Out Negligence & “No Sufficient Cause” Wrong Section Claim Not Fatal: ITAT Remands Matter & Nullifies Penalty Penalty U/s 270A Quashed: No Specific Charge of “Misreporting” = No Penalty View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031