PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. S S PULSES MANUFACTURING PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases of Rs. 4,50,08,383/- , which seemed to be accommodation entries. An order under section 143(3) r/w section 147 was passed on 26th March, 2014, making an entire addition of Rs. 4,50,08,383/- as bogus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(2), NOIDA, NOIDA vs. BHAVYA PIPE INDUSTRY, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Bhavya Pipe Industry Ward-5(1)(2), Plot No. F-39, Site- C, Noida. Vs. Upsidc, Industrial Area, Surajpur ,Gautam Buddha Nagar, Gr. Noida-201306 Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aatfb2209D (Appellant) (Respondent)

143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) dated 12.03.2024 for Assessment Year 2022-23 and the assessee has also filed the Cross Objections. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assesse is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of PVC Pipe under the name and style of M/s Bhavya

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after I.T.A. Nos.7754 & 7755/Del/2018 14 CO Nos.15 & 16/Del/2023 the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after I.T.A. Nos.7754 & 7755/Del/2018 14 CO Nos.15 & 16/Del/2023 the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. KUMAR BROTHERS CO. , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation

KUMAR BROTHERS CO. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar jain, CA and which are passed on to them through the shell companies of the Jain Brothers. 4. Facts taken from the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the record are as under: 5. During the course of search operation