INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. MOTISONS JEWELLERS LTDL, JAIPUR

bogus purchase bill to increase the stock so that same can be shown as stock in hand to support the sale made during the demonetization

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SH. TARA CHAND GUPTA, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Kesh

purchases in relation to such sale is not taxed u/s 69C, then the sale has to be taxed as such ignoring that when profit from Raja Bricks is already taxed, such profit is the source against the purchase of sariya and gartar sold to various persons. Hence what can be added is the profit on such sale for which reliance

SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Ke

purchases in relation to such sale is not taxed u/s 69C, then the sale has to be taxed as such ignoring that when profit from Raja Bricks is already taxed, such profit is the source against the purchase of sariya and gartar sold to various persons. Hence what can be added is the profit on such sale for which reliance

PEEYUSH AGARWAL,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result Ground and 1 and 2 raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

demonetized currency as bogus sale and directed to reduce the same from total sales shown by the appellant and add the same under income from other sources by applying the provisions of section 68/69A of the Act and tax as per the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 3 Peeyush Agarwal, Jaipur. 4. Brief facts of the case

M/S. SHRI NATH CORPORATION,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, C.C.-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee and that of the revenue stands

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

demonetization on 08.11.2016, people had rushed to spend the SBN available with them to purchases gold and other useful items. The ld. AO has also not brought any material on record to establish that the sale vouchers are bogus

DCIT, CC-2,, JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee and that of the revenue stands

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

demonetization on 08.11.2016, people had rushed to spend the SBN available with them to purchases gold and other useful items. The ld. AO has also not brought any material on record to establish that the sale vouchers are bogus

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

bogus purchases, evidence of non-existing of stock as on the date of sales and non-existing cash in the books of account. The sales of the assessee is supported by the sales bill issued to customers and such sales bills are serially numbered. It cannot be denied that before announcement of demonetization

ASHISH BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

purchases are not supported by the quantitative details and the AO did not make any enquiry on the material supplied by the assessee. Thus the AO neither brought any material on record to establish that the sale bills are bogus nor provided any evidence that such sales are bogus. It is also an open fact that the demonetization

ITO, JAIPUR vs. GOTAM AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Purchase of goods before demonetization period, (ii) New business model – no comparison from earlier years, (iii) Cash sales and (iv) Reason for retaining cash in hand were explained to the ld. CIT (A) which are evident from the submissions reproduced. The ld. A/R further submitted that before the ld. CIT (A) it was also explained that section

MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

purchases are not supported by the quantitative details and the AO did not make any enquiry on the material supplied by the assessee. Thus the AO neither brought any material on record to establish that the sale bills are bogus nor provided any evidence that such sales are bogus. It is also an open fact that the demonetization

SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

purchases. The case of assessee is not of bogus\npurchases. Similarly Gujarat High Court decision is in respect of fictitious\npurchase invoices where the High Court disallowed 25% of such\npurchases. Hence this decision is also distinguishable on facts.\nIn view of above, addition confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) be restricted by\napplying appropriate g.p. rate on sale of Rs.3

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI CHANDRA SURANA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Auditor. Any Stock Register Whatsoever Was Not Furnished During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings To Verify The Quantitative Sale Made During The Year Whether The Item Shown By The Assessee As Sold Was Actually In Stock Of The Assessee Or Not & Quantity & Value Of The Sale Shown Remains Unverified. 3. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts By Ignoring The Vital Fact.

purchases are not supported by the quantitative details and the AO did not make any enquiry on the material supplied by the assessee. Thus the AO neither brought any material on record to establish that the sale bills are bogus nor provided any evidence that such sales are bogus. It ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR VS SHRI CHANDRA SURANA

INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR vs. RAJ KUMAR NOWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

bogus purchases, evidence of non-existing of stock as on the date of sales and non-existing cash in the books of account. The sales of the assessee are supported by the sales bills issued to customers and such sales bills are serially numbered. It cannot be denied that before announcement of demonetization

PRIYANKA SURANA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

bogus without giving any example or evidence in a very lightly manner when purchases were made through valid Bills and there payments have been made through account payee cheque up to that date. 11.3 As the assessee maintaining Purchase /sales and other documents in this year the Deepawali was on 30.10.2016, Annkut on 31.10.2016 and on 01.11.2016 there was Bhaiya

RUKMANI JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIR.-4 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

demonetization.:- vide entire para 2 as above. The ld. AO has not brought any evidence on record that the sales is not genuine, the ld. AO has not proved that the purchase was bogus

KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, JAIPUR

In the result ground no 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

purchase of jewellery or gold from the assessee 14 Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT company which also shown that the assessee has been indulged in bogus booking of sale of gold and jewellery items. In view of that fact and evident that the assessee has been indulged in issuances of bogus sale bits and gold items shown

JITENDRA KUMAR TAHILRAMANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, JAIPUR., JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

bogus purchases, and non-existing cash balance in the books of account Similar observations were made by ITAT, Jaipur Bench, in the case of Raj Kumar Nowal, ITA No. 165/JP/2022, Jaipur Bench, 2.13. Attention is drawn towards Hon’ble ITAT, Vishakhapatnam Bench in the case of Hirapanna Jewellers, I.T.A. No. 253/Viz/2020. The facts in this case are that the assessee

SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

bogus.\nThe reasons like non- availability of the said two suppliers at the given\naddresses, non production of two suppliers by the assessee in spite of\nvarious opportunities granted. Assessee has failed to produce the\nowners of the two concerns, Hon'ble High Court also observed that\nmerely voucher of the import export challans or chilans of the custom\nclearance