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

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

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

ANIL KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

bogus purchases. In first appeal, ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of ld. AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

bogus recovery case against the assessee. However he has failed to provide any documentary evidence/petition copy in this regard. Further, the assessee has also failed to explain the nature of suit filed, reason for the suit filed, how the same is related to cash purchase. The assessee has requested to cross examine the MD and accountant of M/s Pragati Glass

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

bogus recovery case against the assessee. However he has failed to provide any documentary evidence/petition copy in this regard. Further, the assessee has also failed to explain the nature of suit filed, reason for the suit filed, how the same is related to cash purchase. The assessee has requested to cross examine the MD and accountant of M/s Pragati Glass

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

bogus recovery case against the assessee. However he has failed to provide any documentary evidence/petition copy in this regard. Further, the assessee has also failed to explain the nature of suit filed, reason for the suit filed, how the same is related to cash purchase. The assessee has requested to cross examine the MD and accountant of M/s Pragati Glass

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

bogus recovery case against the assessee. However he has failed to provide any documentary evidence/petition copy in this regard. Further, the assessee has also failed to explain the nature of suit filed, reason for the suit filed, how the same is related to cash purchase. The assessee has requested to cross examine the MD and accountant of M/s Pragati Glass

MAMRAJ AGGARWAL,DELHI SADAR BAZAR, DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 47(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

bogus purchases and sales to the tune of Rs. 11,16,49,280/- through accommodation entries provided by Sh. Ashok Kumar Gupta. This led to a reassessment notice under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 was invalid and bad in law because the prior approval

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 46(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. MAM RAJ CHUNNI LAL EXIM, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Vs Mam Raj Chunni Lal Exim Ward- 46 (1) Shop No. 5183, Ground New Delhi Floor, Lahori Gate, Naya Bazar, Delhi -110006 Pan No.Aaxfm0533B (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 147 to 151 A have not been complied with. (2) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the impugned addition of Rs.144,15,042/- on merit also made by Ld. AO on account of alleged bogus purchase

SANTOSH RANI LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SH PARVEEN KALYAN,KURUKSHETRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KARNAL, KARNAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Santosh Rani Vs Ito, Legal Heir Of Late Shri Parveen Ward-1, Karnal, Kalyan, Krishna Nagar, Gamri, Haryana-132001. Thanesar, Distt.-Kurukshetra, Haryana-136118. Pan-Awhpr4944D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 Order

purchase consideration of Rs.1.09,88,000/- as per the sale deed dated 25.05.2010 (PB 24-27). It is, therefore, a case of misapplication of the facts in treating the deposits in bank account as well as the investment made out of such deposit as income escaping assessment. The Ld AO has not verified the facts to verify the correctness