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)

natural justice and the right to defend itself was in any manner affected. 5.10 As held by several courts, the department is not required to lead clinching evidence to prove that purchases are bogus

DINESH HALDIA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

nature and volume of transaction appearing in their bank accounts leads the AD. to the conclusion that the purchases were bogus. 7. Before considering the matter, it will not be out of place to mention here that question which is posed for our consideration is whether the purchases which has been done from Vinayak Overseas is genuine

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

Natural Justice, had abused the power by acting arbitrarily and passed a totally unlawful order. In such a case, instead of filing an Appeal against the order of the learned CIT (A), the department should pull up the learned AO and start disciplinary proceedings against him so that such bad orders are not passed In this case the learned

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)

natural justice, the same was again provided to the assessee. Again assessee has not demanded for cross examination. In the statement, Shri Rambabu Samaria has categorically admitted that he has not made any sale during the year to the assessee. This tantamount shows that the purchases made during the year is established as "bogus

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)

justice. 6. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee is an Individual and is engaged in export of gems & jewellery after purchasing it from local market under the name & style of M/s S Naveen Jewellers. The assesses had filed return of income declaring 4 DCIT vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya Income

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

natural justice by holding that\n\"none appeared on the date of hearing on 22.1.202" when the appellant had duly\nfiled request for adjournment on 20.1.2025\n7. The confirming of the addition u/s 69C of Rs.1,82,05,040/-holding that the\nassessee has taken only accommodation entry of genuine purchase by alleging\nas bogus

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

natural justice because of which the assessee\nwas adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the\nCommissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid\ntwo witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the\nstatements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority\ndid not grant this opportunity to the assessee

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities.\nHowever, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur,\nignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity,\nwhich is against the principles of natural justice.\n4. The assessee, registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act,\n1958, was also duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust

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

justice. At the same time Id. AR of the\nassessee did not oppose to the prayer of Id. DR. Considering the factual\naspect we condone the delay of 3 days in filling this appeal in the interest of\njustice.\n6. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that the\nassessee is an Individual and is engaged

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The assessee, registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958, was also duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPURTHE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

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

bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The assessee, registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958, was also duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj 51/117 Sec 5, Pratap Nagar Sanganer, Jaipur cuke Vs. The CIT, Exemption Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATU 6874 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@D

bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The assessee, registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958, was also duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust

SHRI SUNDER DAS SONKIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1383/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sunder Das Sonkia, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Sonkia Bhawan, Sms, Highway, Ward-1(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Akhps 7413 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 09/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.O., Cuke Shri Sunder Das Sonkhiya, Vs. Ward-1(2), Prop.- M/S Naveen Jewellers, Jaipur. Sonkhiya Bhawan, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur. Pan No.: Akhps 7413 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri S.R. Sharma (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeal Filed By The Assessee & The Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Arise Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur Dated 08/11/2019 For The A.Y. 2010-11. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee & The Revenue Are As Under:

bogus purchases from four companies. The A.O. has not examined the information received by him to verify whether assessee has made any purchases from these parties and whether the same is reflected in the accounts or not. The reasons recorded are vague, all consequent proceeding are also illegal and invalid. The AO mechanically and blindly 7 ITA 1383/JP/2019 & 09/JP/2020_

SHRI PREM INDUSTRIES,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BHARATPUR

The appeal is disposed of, and the matter is remanded to

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

nature of that transaction to be fallacious, when one considered the object with which the provision had been brought on the statute book. He 32 Shri Prem Industries vs. ITO has taken us through the reasonings of all the authorities and submitted that the Tribunal has not committed any error while passing the impugned judgment. 12. We have heard learned

SHRI ARNAV GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

bogus without giving an opportunity of cross examination is a complete violation of principles of natural justice as held in CCE Vs Andaman Timber Industries 127 DTR 241(SC). The AO has not controverted the evidence of purchase

ABHAY CHORDIA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

bogus purchases but real. In support of it assessee inter alia filed before the AO copy of purchase invoices, bank statements confirming to have made payments by assessee to the selling concern by account payee cheques/bank transfers and statements of accounts duly certified by the selling dealers. To get verified these papers, documents from the assessee’s books of accounts

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. POOJA KEDIA, JAIPUIR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

natural justice does not form part of any Act yet it\nhave to be implemented. This principle was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in\nanother case Sahara India (Firm) vs CIT Central, reported in2008] 169 Taxman\n328 (SC)/[2008] 300 ITR 403 (SC)/[2008]. In this case it was held that the exercise of\npowers under Section 142(2A) cannot

SHRI ASHNUTH GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, WARD -1(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him. Thus, The Addition Of Rs. 30,04,864/- So Uphold Deserves To Be Deleted. Shri Ashnuth Goyal Vs Acit, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

bogus without giving an opportunity of cross examination is a complete violation of principles of natural justice as held in CCE Vs Andaman Timber Industries 127 DTR 241(SC). The AO has not controverted the evidence of purchase