JUDGEMENTopens in new window

bogus purchases in value should be added to the assessee’s declared/returned income. (iii) Addition made, under Section 68 of the Act, in respect of monies deposited by the assessee with its banker during the demonetization period. 2.1. Insofar as issue nos. (i) and (ii) are concerned, they were common to all six AYs, referred to hereinabove. However, insofar

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

bogus purchases in value should be added to the assessee’s declared/returned income. (iii) Addition made, under Section 68 of the Act, in respect of monies deposited by the assessee with its banker during the demonetization period. 2.1. Insofar as issue nos. (i) and (ii) are concerned, they were common to all six AYs, referred to hereinabove. However, insofar

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

92,200/- made in the assessment order on ITA Nos. 6893 to 6897/Del/2019 Kumar Brothers Co. account of bogus purchase without considering the fact that these documents were intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the figures of accommodation entries only as there were no documents for supporting the transactions mentioned in tally documents. The manual resister also

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

section 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer acquired the mandate even to add the whole amount of purchases found as bogus to the total income of the assessee. One such case was Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT 294 ITR 316 (All) wherein the Page 6 of 16 DCIT Vs. S.S. Pulses [A.Y 2012-13] entire amount

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

92,52,710/- shown by the appellant. The reasons stated by the AO for rejecting the books of account are as under: “16. Reasons for rejecting books of account 1 Statements of entry operators and other circumstantial information received amply prove that the purchases made by the assessee are bogus in nature. 2 Bogus purchases shows that the books

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

92,52,710/- shown by the appellant. The reasons stated by the AO for rejecting the books of account are as under: “16. Reasons for rejecting books of account 1 Statements of entry operators and other circumstantial information received amply prove that the purchases made by the assessee are bogus in nature. 2 Bogus purchases shows that the books

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. REETA GOEL, MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2021-22

purchases amounting to Rs. 2,92,93,288/- and taxing only 25% of these bogus claim goes against the principles of Sections

SMT. REETA GOEL,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2021-22

purchases amounting to Rs. 2,92,93,288/- and taxing only 25% of these bogus claim goes against the principles of Sections

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DHADDA INTERNATIONAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

bogus unsecured loans and sales were being routed in benami concerns. Assessee in response responded that these are genuine transactions of the purchases which have been then sold to customers on which assessee has paid the tax. Further, it was submitted that all the payments made against these purchases were through account payee cheques which were duly reflected