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

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

151 2,34,55,383 2,60,85,530 and v) 2018-19 37,46,910 3,02,30,766 3,39,77,680 2019-20 vi) 2019-20 63,28,050 3,34,21,765 3,97,49,820 xi) 24.8.2022 Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 3 The brief facts

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

151 2,34,55,383 2,60,85,530 and v) 2018-19 37,46,910 3,02,30,766 3,39,77,680 2019-20 vi) 2019-20 63,28,050 3,34,21,765 3,97,49,820 xi) 24.8.2022 Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 3 The brief facts

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

151 2,34,55,383 2,60,85,530 and v) 2018-19 37,46,910 3,02,30,766 3,39,77,680 2019-20 vi) 2019-20 63,28,050 3,34,21,765 3,97,49,820 xi) 24.8.2022 Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 3 The brief facts

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

151 2,34,55,383 2,60,85,530 and v) 2018-19 37,46,910 3,02,30,766 3,39,77,680 2019-20 vi) 2019-20 63,28,050 3,34,21,765 3,97,49,820 xi) 24.8.2022 Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 3 The brief facts

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

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to the tune of 25% without considering the fact that the purchase amounts are nothing but bogus purchase entries taken by the appellant from the Jain Brothers. These are taken through the intermediary Suni Kumar

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 in their books.\nThe assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation\nentries provided by the entities controlled and managed by\nSh. Ashok Kumar Gupta and has booked non genuine\nbogus sales in his books of accounts to tune of\nRs.11,16,49,280/-. Notice under section 148 of the Act\ndated

ADITI INFRABUILD AND SERVICES LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 30, DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

151,404.00 ADITI INFRABUILD AND SERVICES LIMITED DETAILS OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTIC CHARGES PAID Sr.No. Particulars Amount 1. Freight & Cartage for Material Purchase 3,046,402 2. Transportation Charges (Subcontractor) 213,736,472 3. Toll Expenses for Material through own Vehicle 4,538,908 4. Transportation Charges for Bitumen Material 799,659 5. Transportation Charges for Aggregate Materila Supply