SHRI MANOJ AMAR CHAND TAILOR,MASUDA BIJAINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BEAWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

bogus purchases = Rs. 22,21,78,361 * 15%). Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to Rs. 30,13,471 (Total purchases = Rs.60,26,94,181* 0.5%) 2. Submission 2.1. The assessee for the year under consideration was liable to get his accounts audited as per the provisions of Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.2. The tax auditor

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BEAWAR vs. SHRI MANOJ AMAR CHAND TAILOR, MASUDA BIJAINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

bogus purchases = Rs. 22,21,78,361 * 15%). Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to Rs. 30,13,471 (Total purchases = Rs.60,26,94,181* 0.5%) 2. Submission 2.1. The assessee for the year under consideration was liable to get his accounts audited as per the provisions of Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.2. The tax auditor

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.

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

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-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S JK INTERNATIONAL, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue is dismissed with

purchase bill to various people. The modus operandi is explained and tabulated in the assessment order where in various entities are listed providing such bogus bills. The relevant portion of the statement is also reproduced in the order passed u/s 143(3) / 153A. 6.2 I have carefully perused the order and I find that the addition made on the basis

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

M/S SILVEX & CO.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

bogus purchases, the ground no. 3 becomes infructuous. 6. Ground No. 4 & 5 relates to the disallowances of Rs. 31,272/-, Rs. 8,453/- and Rs. 30,541/- out of expenses claimed at Rs. 1,56,361/-, Rs. 42,265/- and Rs. 1,52,707/- under the head office maintenance expenses & office expenses, Staff Welfare expenses and Telephone expenses respectively

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SHRI SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

purchase and sale of shares, it can be good reason to treat transactions as bogus difference of case of Udit Kalra attempted by Ld. AR does not add any credence to justify transactions. Investigation Wing has also conducted enquires which proved that assessee is also one of beneficiaries of transactions and entries provided, Even BSE listed this company as being

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 vs. M/S N. M. AGROFOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

purchase and sale of shares, it can be good reason to treat transactions as bogus difference of case of Udit Kalra attempted by Ld. AR does not add any credence to justify transactions. Investigation Wing has also conducted enquires which proved that assessee is also one of beneficiaries of transactions and entries provided, Even BSE listed this company as being

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

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