INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), JAIPUR vs. KIRAN INFRA ISPAT LIMITED, JAIPUR

addition cannot be made\nunless such information is provided to the assessee and opportunity of cross\nexamination is provided more so when assessee placed on record all the\nevidences. The relevant findings are as under:\nHeadnote: Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure -\nAllowability of (Bogus purchase

RAVI KUMAR RAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed and impugned orders are set aside

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

income of 25% of the alleged bogus purchases. SHRI RAVI KUMAR RAWAT VS DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR The ld. CIT(A) has estimated 15% of the profit on such purchases, accordingly given partial relief. In quantum appeal, the Tribunal have confirmed the order of the ld. CIT(A) upholding the addition

RAVI KUMAR RAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed and impugned orders are set aside

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) which was partly considered by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14-12-2018 in Appeal No. 474/2015-16. Vide that order Ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition from Rs.6,01,459/- to Rs.2,67,647/- by applying G.P. Rate @ 12%. Hence, the addition of Rs.2,67,647/- was sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, Ld. AO passed penalty order dated 01-05-2020 wherein the AO imposed the penalty on the assessee for an amount of Rs.1,03,150/- u/s Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by observing as under:-

income of 25% of the alleged bogus purchases. SHRI RAVI KUMAR RAWAT VS DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR The ld. CIT(A) has estimated 15% of the profit on such purchases, accordingly given partial relief. In quantum appeal, the Tribunal have confirmed the order of the ld. CIT(A) upholding the addition

SHRI KHANDELWAL DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Him On The Reason Of Issuing Notice U/S 148 On Borrowed Satisfaction Of Another Wing Of The Department.

addition of 25% of alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 35,09,770/- made from 3 parties without any basis. 2. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred seriously in law and on facts in sustaining the validity of notice issued by ld. AO u/s 148 of the Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

addition related to the alleged bogus purchases made by the assessee from the concerns managed by Shri Rajendra Jain and his associates we deal both the grounds together. 13.1 Brief facts related to the dispute are that the assessee is an Individual, engaged in export of gems & jewellery under the name & style of M/s S Naveen Jewellers. Return of income

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JPR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the results all the appeals filed by the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the approval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as nothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section 153D of Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

bogus but were made from\nthe parties other than those mentioned in the books of account. That being the\nposition, not the entire purchase price but only the profit element embedded in\nsuch purchases can be added to the income of the assessee. So much is clear\nby the decision of this court. In particular, the court has also taken

SHRI KHANDELWAL DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

addition of Rs. 80,48,367/-, being 25% of alleged bogus purchases without any basis.” 3. The fact as culled out from the records is that that assessee Company has filed its e-return of income

ALKA KHANDAKA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

addition the income so assessed in not tenable in the eye of law. In fact the AO neither found any concrete and conclusive evidence of back dating of the entries of sale, evidence of bogus sales, evidence of bogus purchases

JAJOO RASHMI REFRACTORIES LIMITED,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4-JAIPUR,, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Income Tax, Patiala in ITA No.\n275/Chandi/2024 (Kindly see in Case law paper book page no. 155-177) wherein facts are\nabsolutely identical and the addition made on account of alleged bogus purchase

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

addition made merely on the ground that\nthe assessee is accounted bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

addition made merely on the ground that\nthe assessee is accounted bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income

SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEEMUCH vs. THE PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

bogus purchases as compared to G.P. on normal purchases In the present case also, since the ld. AO has examined the profit worked out on unaccounted purchases and has accepted such working prepared by assessee by observing that : “It is also submitted that assessee company has now offered the additional undisclosed income

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

addition made merely on the ground that\nthe assessee is accounted bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

addition made merely on the ground that\nthe assessee is accounted bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income

R P WOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD ,NAYA BAZAR AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

addition made during the assessment proceedings but the conditions provided under section 271AAB are precedent for levy of penalty. The assessment order is relevant only for the purpose of limitation provided under section 275 of the IT Act whereas the penalty under section 271AAB has to be imposed only when the income disclosed by the assessee falls in the ambit

VIJAY KEDIA (HUF),JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1266/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2008-09 M/S Vijay Kedia, Cuke A.C.I.T., 1307, Gopal Ji Ka Rasta, Johari Vs. Central Circle-1, Bazar, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabhv 6449 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri S.R. Sharma (Ca)& Shri R.K. Bhatra (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 19/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 1, Jaipur Dated 02/09/2019 For The A.Y. 2008-09, Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Wrong, Unjust & Has Erred In Law In Not Accepting Plea Of The Appellant That The Notice Issued By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Is Wrong & Bad In Law Inasmuch As It Did Not Specify In Which Limb Of Sec. 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 The Penalty Proceedings Has Been Initiated I.E. Whether For Concealment Of Income Or Furnishing Of Inaccurate Particulars Of Income.

income of assessee on average gross profit declared and admitted by the A.O.. Thus, in this way, the purchases which was held unverifiable cannot be held to be bogus and the addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. NARESH KUMAR GUPTA, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the

Bench: Him The Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short “Act” ] By The Acit, Circle, Sri Ganganagar [

addition is called for on the issue. The appellant has also raised a alternate argument that it is a settled law that no sale can take place without the purchase and if the appellant has indulged into bogus purchases in such a case a percentage of the bogus purchases can be added to arrive at the net income