TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 903
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i in appeal Nos.CIT(A)-50/IT-73/2016-17-AY 2006-07, CIT(A)-50/IT-72/2016-17-AY 2007-08, CIT(A)-50/IT-71/2016-17-AY 2008-09 & CIT(A)-50/IT-70/2016-17-AY 2009-10 respectively dated 25/04/2016 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.144 r.w.s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 21/03/2016 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence, they are taken up together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. At the outset we find that all these appeals are recalled matters vide M.A Order in MA Nos.22-25/Mum/2020 dated 24/07/2020 wherein ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tali Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd and Gold Star Finvest Pvt. Ltd. The said cases were related to same search in which the commission was assessed @ 0.15% of total deposits but the alternate contention was not dealing with the Hon'ble ITAT, therefore, the present Miscellaneous Application has been filed. 4. We have heard the argument advanced by the Ld. Representative of the parties and perused the record. All the appeals bearing ITA. Nos. 7105/M/2017 to 7108/M/2017 for the A.Y.2006-7 to 2009-10 has been decided by Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai 'F' Bench by virtue of order dated 25.03.2019. After perusing the order dated 25.03.2019, we noticed that the decisions in the case of Chaitali Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd. and Gold Star FinvestPvt. Ltd. were not d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that, he being an accommodation entry provider, had resorted to issue various bogus bills to various parties through his various entities and one such entity was Khyati Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd., i.e. the assessee herein. It is not in dispute before us at this stage that assessee company is engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries. We find that there were credits to the tune of Rs. 2,19,20,333/- in the bank account of the assessee company, on which only commission income @4% was originally added by the ld. AO in the assessment framed u/s.153C of the Act. Later, this assessment was sought to be revised u/s.263 of the Act by the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax directing the ld. AO to add 100% of the credits in the bank accou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts and debits in the bank account of the assessee company. In support of this, the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions:- a. DCIT vs. Chaitali Sales Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.4908 and 4910/Mum/2016 dated 17/05/2017 for A.Yrs. 2009-10 and 2011-12 respectively, where the commission income @.15% was directed to be added by this Tribunal under the similar facts and circumstances emanating out of the identical search in the case of JIK Industries Ltd., u/s.132 of the Act, as in the case of the assessee hereinbefore us. b. DCIT vs. Chaitali Sales in ITA No.4909/Mum/2016 for A.Y.2010-11 dated 05/09/2018. c. Decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Mihir Agencies Pvt. Ltd., in In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nate contention during the course of original appellate proceedings. In fact the same issue was also raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) which is also evident from the perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) in page 5 of its order. Moreover, this alternate contention raised by the assessee was also accepted by this tribunal in the MA order referred to supra. In this peculiar factual background, we are inclined to entertain the additional ground raised by the assessee in the present proceedings before us for all the assessment years under consideration. From the perusal of the various Tribunal and Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court orders referred to supra and more so in the case of certain sister concerns of the assessee which was al....