CIT v. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd.

316 ITR 125High Court2009#2637 most cited

What is CIT v. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

When books of account are rejected under Section 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, income must be estimated on best judgment, using the assessee's past history as the primary guide for such estimation.

44

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. · Inani Marbles · section 145(3) · rejection of books of account · best judgment assessment · income estimation · assessee's past history · Rajasthan High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 145(3)Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 144Section 144BSection 68Section 142(1)Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 69dtrade creditorssection 145(2)rejection of books of accountsection 153a(1)(b)mistake apparent from recordsection 145(3)section 127section 69bsanctioning authoritysection 145dumb documents

Judgments citing CIT v. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 114/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal(CIT)&
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…g the A.Y.2009-10 and 2010-11 widely vary from the circumstances prevailing during the year under appeal such as the price of commodity i.e. gold and market demand which are most effecting factor in this regard. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: 316 ITR 125 (2009) CIT Vs. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (Raj.) Accounting – Rejection of accounts – Application of gross profit rate – Tribunal justified in applying gross profit rate of prior year – Income Tax Act, 1961, s. 145. For the assessment year 2000-01 , the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee’s books of account for valid reasons and invoked the prov…

M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 113/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal(CIT)&
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…g the A.Y.2009-10 and 2010-11 widely vary from the circumstances prevailing during the year under appeal such as the price of commodity i.e. gold and market demand which are most effecting factor in this regard. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: 316 ITR 125 (2009) CIT Vs. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (Raj.) Accounting – Rejection of accounts – Application of gross profit rate – Tribunal justified in applying gross profit rate of prior year – Income Tax Act, 1961, s. 145. For the assessment year 2000-01 , the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee’s books of account for valid reasons and invoked the prov…

Basant Gupta, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

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

ITA 63/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 44A

…history of similarly situated other businessmen/traders is the best guide. We concur with the said settled legal position and in this regard we draw strength from the decisions of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Inani Marbles (P) Ltd. (2009) 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) and also Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Action Electricals (2002) 258 ITR 188 (Delhi) wherein in both the above cases it has been categorically held that the past history of the assessee would be one of the reliable guidelines to make or not to make any estimation/addition and on this aspect our stand also fortified with the dec…

M/S Raj Auto Wheels P .Ltd., Ajmer vs. JCIT, Range-1, Ajmer

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

ITA 397/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR
Section 131Section 145(3)Section 194ASection 40

…consideration the GP rate has been declared as 4.85 percent- AO was unable to point out as to what are the distinguishing features in between the two assessment years-No substantial question of law arises.”, In the case of CIT v/s Inani Marbles P. Ltd. (2009) 316 ITR 125 (Raj) (DPB 36-37), it was held that: 8 ITA NO. 397/JP/2015 RAJ AUTO WHEELS (P) LTD. VS JCIT, RANGE-1, AJMER “Accounts—Rejection—GP rate—Assessee’s own result of immediately preceding assessment year at 2.51 per cent having been accepted upto the level of Tribunal, Tribunal was justified in applying the same GP rate for the assessment year in qu…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1-2, Ajmer vs. Shri Bhagchand Jain, Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1271/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 145Section 145(3)

…that past history has been held to be the best guide in the cases of fair estimation. Kindly refer 17 ITA 1271/JP/2018 & CO 42/JP/2018_ ITO Vs Sh. Bhagchand Jain Kindly refer CIT v/s Gupta K.N. Construction Co. (2015) 116 DTR 377 (Raj), CIT v/s Inani Marbles 316 ITR 125 (Raj). However, it will appears that in the present case, the ld. CIT(A)has not made a fair estimation in conformity of the above settled judicial guideline. The assessee, this year declared GP rate of 2.17% on sales of Rs.9,40,65,836/- as against GP rate of 2.84% on sales of Rs.6,64,75,224/- (Refer AO Pg- 3-4)in the immediately preceding year (i…

Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

ITA 534/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…come of the assessee by applying the net profit rate of 4% will meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) accordingly and partly allow the ground of the appeal of the assessee.” v. In the case of CIT vsInani Marbles (P) Ltd [2009] 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) held that‘The Tribunal held that in the absence of any change in the factual position normally the profit rate declared and accepted in the preceding year, constitutes a good basis for working out the gross profit” vi. Further also Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of CIT VsNandaramHunda Ram (1976) 103 ITR 433, wherein it is held that…

Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

ITA 533/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…come of the assessee by applying the net profit rate of 4% will meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) accordingly and partly allow the ground of the appeal of the assessee.” v. In the case of CIT vsInani Marbles (P) Ltd [2009] 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) held that‘The Tribunal held that in the absence of any change in the factual position normally the profit rate declared and accepted in the preceding year, constitutes a good basis for working out the gross profit” vi. Further also Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of CIT VsNandaramHunda Ram (1976) 103 ITR 433, wherein it is held that…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 375/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…come of the assessee by applying the net profit rate of 4% will meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) accordingly and partly allow the ground of the appeal of the assessee.” v. In the case of CIT vsInani Marbles (P) Ltd [2009] 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) held that‘The Tribunal held that in the absence of any change in the factual position normally the profit rate declared and accepted in the preceding year, constitutes a good basis for working out the gross profit” vi. Further also Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of CIT VsNandaramHunda Ram (1976) 103 ITR 433, wherein it is held that…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 374/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…come of the assessee by applying the net profit rate of 4% will meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) accordingly and partly allow the ground of the appeal of the assessee.” v. In the case of CIT vsInani Marbles (P) Ltd [2009] 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) held that‘The Tribunal held that in the absence of any change in the factual position normally the profit rate declared and accepted in the preceding year, constitutes a good basis for working out the gross profit” vi. Further also Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of CIT VsNandaramHunda Ram (1976) 103 ITR 433, wherein it is held that…

Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 10(1), Kolkata

ITA 2116/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…come of the assessee by applying the net profit rate of 4% will meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) accordingly and partly allow the ground of the appeal of the assessee.” v. In the case of CIT vsInani Marbles (P) Ltd [2009] 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) held that‘The Tribunal held that in the absence of any change in the factual position normally the profit rate declared and accepted in the preceding year, constitutes a good basis for working out the gross profit” vi. Further also Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of CIT VsNandaramHunda Ram (1976) 103 ITR 433, wherein it is held that…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. Shiv Edibles Ltd., Kota

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 479/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 145(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES ‘A’, JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 479/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2015-16 cuke Assistant Commissioner of Income Shiv Edibles Ltd. Vs. Tax, Circle-01, Kota 237/A, Talwandi, Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAICS0274K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Mahe…

ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S. Lakhi Gems, Jaipur

In the result, ground of appeal taken by the Revenue as well as that of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1306/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jun 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147

…2.2017) • DCIT Vs. M/s Gems Paradise (ITA No.747/JP/12 order dt. 26.12.2017) • CIT Vs. Vaibhav Gems Ltd. (2014) 112 DTR 84 dt. 21.08.2014 (Raj) • CIT Vs. Sh. Sindhuja Foods Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 16 DTR 278 dt.24.10.2008 (Raj.) (HC) • CIT Vs. Inani Marbles Pvt Ltd. 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) (HC) • Kansara Bearings P. Ltd Vs. ACIT 270 ITR 235 (Raj) • Malani Ramjivan Jagannath Vs. ACIT 207 CTR (Raj.)19: It was held that:- • CIT Vs. Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog 256 ITR 243(Raj) 6 ITA No. 1306/JP/2019 & CO No. 04/JP/2020 ACIT, Jaipur Vs. M/s Lakhi Gems, Jaipur In view of the above the trading addition of Rs. 7,02,120/- made by the A…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. Shri Ganpati Developers, Kota

In the result, both i.e. appeal of the Revenue and C

ITA 1348/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1348/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2015-16 A.C.I.T., Cuke M/S Shri Ganpati Developers, Vs. Circle-1, C-150, Road No. 5, I.P.I.A., Kota. Kota. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abzfs 8967 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)

…esident Industries (2000) 158 CTR 372 (Guj) (ii) CIT vs. Gotan Lime Khanij Udhyog (2001) 169 CTR 318 (Raj) (iii) CIT vs. Bakhand Ajit Kumar (2004) 186 CTR 419 (MP) (iv) Man Mohan Sadani vs. CIT (2008) 304 ITR 052 (MP) (v) CIT vs. Inani Marbles (P) Ltd. (2009) 316 ITR 125 (Raj) (vi) Ritesh Kumar Somani vs. ITO— ITA No.618/JP/2011 dated 30.12.2011 (Jaipur ITAT) (vii) Babulal Somani vs. ITO — ITA No. 610/JP/2011 dated 13.01.2012 (Jaipur ITAT) 10. Non mentioning of Skeleton in Flat no. 203 by deed writer is a technical flaw. It's sale price is not disputed by. Service. Tax Authorities and Stamp Authorities. Therefor…

Shri Manoj Kumar Johari, Sikar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Sikar

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 535/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 535/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year: 2013-14 Manoj Kumar Johari, Cuke A.C.I.T. Vs. Prop. Of The Art Palace, Zee Circle-Sikar. Bhawan, Subhash Chowk, Ramgarh-Shekhawati, Sikar. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Adwpj 8870 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vikash Rajvanshi (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 16/02/2018 For The A.Y. 2013-14, Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken: “1. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Fact In Estimating 12.86% Gp Rate On The Basis Of 5 Year’S Average Assessed Gp Rate & Sustained Gp Addition Of Rs. 20,43,900/- Without Considering Actual Gp & Even Not Considering The Actual Average Of Last 5 Year Gp. 2. The Appellant Prays Your Honor To Add, Amend Or Alter All Or Any Of The Grounds Of The Appeal On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Rajvanshi (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…r to average rate of five years i.e. 12.15% and better of 3 year GP of 8.48% & our current year GP is higher, hence declared rate is correct and justified. Jurisdictional Honorable Rajasthan High Court has decided in the case of Inani Marble Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) and Hon. Delhi High Court in case of Action Electricals (2002) 258 ITR 188 (Del) held that past history of the assessee would be one of the reliable guideline to make or not to make any addition. Hence considering the past history average GP of 5 years is 12.15% which is nearer to current year GP and better of 3 year GP of 8.48% which is l…

Shri Giriraj Prasad Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 782/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: The Hearing Of The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 131Section 68

…ars. Hence, when the AO has not found that the assessee has inflated the expenses, then merely because the payment was made in cash cannot be a reason for such adhoc disallowance. He has relied upon the following decisions :- CIT vs. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) CIT vs. Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog 256 ITR 243 (Raj.) 10. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that the assessee has not produced the supporting bills and vouchers to substantiate the claim. Therefore, the assessee has failed to establish that the expenditure has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the business of the assessee.…

Shri Giriraj Prasad Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 781/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: The Hearing Of The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 131Section 68

…ars. Hence, when the AO has not found that the assessee has inflated the expenses, then merely because the payment was made in cash cannot be a reason for such adhoc disallowance. He has relied upon the following decisions :- CIT vs. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) CIT vs. Gotan Lime Khaniz Udyog 256 ITR 243 (Raj.) 10. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that the assessee has not produced the supporting bills and vouchers to substantiate the claim. Therefore, the assessee has failed to establish that the expenditure has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the business of the assessee.…

Hydroair Tectonics (Pcd) Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 3949/MUM/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)

…Where, therefore, it is not possible to discover any basis, rational or otherwise, from the order of the assessing authority, the estimate made cannot be anything but arbitrary, and, so, cannot be sustained. 3.52 In the case of CIT vs. Inani Marbles (P) Ltd. 316 ITR 125, Rajasthan High Court held that the authorities do not get unfettered powers to apply any GP rate of their choice. In absence of any change in factual position, profit rate declared and accepted in preceding years constituted a good basis for working out gross profit rate. 3.53 Once the books of account of assessee are rejected, then, profit has…

Rajkumari Singh, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 8, Mumbai

ITA 946/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)

…Where, therefore, it is not possible to discover any basis, rational or otherwise, from the order of the assessing authority, the estimate made cannot be anything but arbitrary, and, so, cannot be sustained. 3.52 In the case of CIT vs. Inani Marbles (P) Ltd. 316 ITR 125, Rajasthan High Court held that the authorities do not get unfettered powers to apply any GP rate of their choice. In absence of any change in factual position, profit rate declared and accepted in preceding years constituted a good basis for working out gross profit rate. 3.53 Once the books of account of assessee are rejected, then, profit has…

Shri Habib Khan, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 598/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Dec 2018AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B. K. Gupta (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…t judgment. The GP rate is considered as a proper and reasonable basis and a guidance for the best judgment of estimation of income. It is settled position of law as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd., 316 ITR 125 (Raj.) as well as in the case of Kansara Bearings Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 270 ITR 235 (Raj.) that the GP rate declared and accepted in the earlier years can be a reasonable and proper basis for estimation of income of the assessee. Accordingly, the average GP declared by the assessee which has attained the finality shall be the proper and reasonable…

Kothari Jewels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Apr 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S. R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT)
Section 132Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 153A

…at after rejection of books of accounts the profit is to be estimated either on the basis of past history of the appellant's case or on the basis of any comparable case. Reliance is placed on the following case laws: i) CIT vs. Inani Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 316 ITR 125 (Raj) ii) Ajay Goyal vs. ITO (2006) 99 TTJ 164 (ITAT, Jaipur) iii) ITO Ward 2 Churu vs. Jai Construction Co., ITA NO. 64/JU/2014 (ITAT, Jodhpur) iv) M/s Bhika Ram Devrath vs. ITO Ward-1, Churu, ITA No. 245/Jodh/2013 (ITAT, Jodhpur). As regards the various case laws relied upon by the appellant it may be mentioned that in these case laws essentia…