ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. M/S PUNJAB RICE LAND PRIVATE LIMITED , TARN TARAN

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

reopening of the assessment in case of M/s Punjab Rice Land Pvt. Ltd.: Brief details of information collected/ received by the AO:- Information has been received from the office of ADIT (Inv.), Amritsar that the assessee company has made bogus purchases

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. M/S PUNJAB RICE LAND PRIVATE LIMITED, TARN TARAN

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

reopening of the assessment in case of M/s Punjab Rice Land Pvt. Ltd.: Brief details of information collected/ received by the AO:- Information has been received from the office of ADIT (Inv.), Amritsar that the assessee company has made bogus purchases

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FARIDKOT, BSNL BUILDING vs. M/S VOHRA SOLVEX PVT. LTD, SADIQ ROAD

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

Assessing Officer in reopening of the case u/s 148 on account of alleged bogus purchases of Rice Phuck and Nakku

NEERAJ KUMAR SETHI,DELHI vs. ITO, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

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

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reopening proceedings commencing from reasons recorded to assessment has been solely and wholly based on the statement of the person Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta. 9. Subsequently assessment completed with an addition of Rs.1.98 crores (being the sum total of alleged bogus purchase

PUNEET SAHDEV,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

Bogus purchases : Rs. 2,08,51,002/- (+) Rs. 1,05,56,012/-] chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, therein reopened

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMMU vs. SH. PUNEET SEHDEV, PROP., JAMMU

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

Bogus purchases : Rs. 2,08,51,002/- (+) Rs. 1,05,56,012/-] chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, therein reopened

SH. PUNEET SEHDEV PROP;,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JAMMU

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

Bogus purchases : Rs. 2,08,51,002/- (+) Rs. 1,05,56,012/-] chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, therein reopened

SH. PUNEET SEHDEV PROP,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

Bogus purchases : Rs. 2,08,51,002/- (+) Rs. 1,05,56,012/-] chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, therein reopened

NASA AGRO INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,FAZILKA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reopening also has been properly done. The assessment as such is very much sustainable and is not bad in the eyes of law. 4.3 The investigation report and the enquiries carried out by the AO show that the purchases are bogus

SHRI SHAM SUNDER AGGARWAL,KAPURTHALA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2 , KAPUTHALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, ITA

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

assessing authority passed under section 148 of the Act. Considering the fact of the case the reopening was made under section 148 was related to bogus purchase

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reopen assessment, though wide, are not plenary-Interest allowed as deduction in original assessment subsequently ITO found that creditors were name-lenders-Confession from creditors There was nothing to show that the confession related to a loan advanced to assessee-The live link or close nexus between material before ITO and belief he was to form regarding escapement of income

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reopen assessment, though wide, are not plenary-Interest allowed as deduction in original assessment subsequently ITO found that creditors were name-lenders-Confession from creditors There was nothing to show that the confession related to a loan advanced to assessee-The live link or close nexus between material before ITO and belief he was to form regarding escapement of income

M/S HOLY FAITH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD,JALANDHAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.181/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/S Holy Faith International Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Mbd House, Central Circle-Ii, Railway Road, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach6111J Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Bhawani Shankar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2019 Order Per N. K. Saini: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-I, Jalandhar. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Worthy Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-1, Jalandhar Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Assessee. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Contention Of The Assessing Officer In Reopening The Case U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act And, Thus, Framing Of Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S.143(3)/153C At An Income Of Rs. 4,95,13,441/- Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 4,63,33,441/-. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Considering That There Was No Reason To Believe That The Income Of The

bogus purchases. Such an entry was also provided to the assessee by M/s Nazar Impex Pvt. Ltd., one of its group companies of Rs.31,50,000/-. On that basis, the AO reopened the assessment

SHRI SHAM SUNDER AGGARWAL,KAPURTHALA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

purchases made from said 18 parties, being bogus and unverifiable, was required to be added as against the addition of Rs.9,24,491/- made on account of 5% VAT disallowed. ii) Firstly, for reopening of this case, when it had already been assessed

MEASAGE BHAI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

assessment is bad in law. 3. Notwithstanding the above said grounds of appeals, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of the genuine purchases of wheat to the tune of Rs.58,74,080/- as bogus purchases, ignoring the fact that the purchases of wheat are duly supported by the relevant bills of the parties and the payment

KUNDAN JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHI CHOWK, SADAR BAZAR, MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MUKTSAR, MUKTSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

reopening of the assessment in the present case was not valid, accordingly, the same is quashed. Fortune Metaliks Limited vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019 dated 12.01.2021-CHD Trib "7. We have heard both the parties. We find merit in the contention of the Id. counsel for the assessee that the reassessment proceedings undertaken by the AO in the present case

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1 (2), BATHINDA vs. MESERS SHREE BHAGWATI COTTON TRADERS ,, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

bogus as the assessee failed to prove genuineness of sales in respect of such alleged purchases. (v) The CIT(A) erred in observing that taking out of purchases from trading account would show abnormal GP without appreciating that onus was upon the assessee to disclose source of purchases in respect of sales made during the year

MESERS SHREE BHAGWATI COTTON TRADERS,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1 (2), BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

bogus as the assessee failed to prove genuineness of sales in respect of such alleged purchases. (v) The CIT(A) erred in observing that taking out of purchases from trading account would show abnormal GP without appreciating that onus was upon the assessee to disclose source of purchases in respect of sales made during the year