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)

search and seizure operation u/s 132 by the DGIT (Inv.) - Wing Mumbai on 03.10.3013 in the group cases of Shri Rajendra Jain, Shri Sanjay Choudhary and Shri Dharmichand Jain of Mumbai, it was gathered that this group indulged in providing accommodation entries in the nature of bogus purchase

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

purchase-tax. Mahabir Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 71 ITR87 (All) held that penalty payable under 3(5) of the Sugarcane Cess Act was a penalty for making default in the payment of arrears of sugarcane cess levied under the said Act. It was a criminal liability and was not a permissible deduction under section

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

search and seizure operation u/s 132 by the DGIT\n(Inv.) - Wing Mumbai on 03.10.3013 in the group cases of Shri Rajendra\nJain, Shri Sanjay Choudhary and Shri Dharmichand Jain of Mumbai, it was\ngathered that this group indulged in providing accommodation entries in the\nnature of bogus purchase

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

purchaser also was unearthed and exact amount of income escaped from assessment was supported by ample evidence- Whether therefore, no ground could be taken that other material which were already available with Department could not be relied on in proceedings- Held, yes [Paras 13, 21 and 22] [In favour of revenue]" (X) The ld AR has placed reliance

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

purchaser also was unearthed and exact amount of income escaped from assessment was supported by ample evidence- Whether therefore, no ground could be taken that other material which were already available with Department could not be relied on in proceedings- Held, yes [Paras 13, 21 and 22] [In favour of revenue]" (X) The ld AR has placed reliance

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

purchaser also was unearthed and exact amount of income escaped from assessment was supported by ample evidence- Whether therefore, no ground could be taken that other material which were already available with Department could not be relied on in proceedings- Held, yes [Paras 13, 21 and 22] [In favour of revenue]" (X) The ld AR has placed reliance

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

search and seizure operation. The core dispute revolved around the genuineness of purchases made by the assessee.", "held": "The Tribunal observed that the revenue failed to produce any incriminating material to prove the purchases were bogus

SH. KAPIL TANEJA,JAIPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Bogus purchase) - Certain portion of purchases made by assessee was disallowed - Commissioner (Appeals) found that entire disallowance was based on third party information gathered by Investigation Wing of Department, which had not been independently subjected to further verification by Assessing Officer and he had not provided copy of such statements to appellant, thus, denying opportunity of cross examination to appellant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

seizure action on the appellant and therefore, the addition has been made without the basis / source of incriminating material unearthed from the search action. The bench noted that the assessee has supported the transaction by stating that there was no ban in purchasing & selling shares of 'Anax.com' / 'Yamini Investments' at the time when the assessee entered in purchases & sales transactions

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

seizure action on the appellant and therefore, the addition has been made without the basis / source of incriminating material unearthed from the search action. The bench noted that the assessee has supported the transaction by stating that there was no ban in purchasing & selling shares of 'Anax.com' / 'Yamini Investments' at the time when the assessee entered in purchases & sales transactions

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 bills and the finding is solely based on the self-serving statements/affidavits of proprietor/director of respective concern which is contrary to the findings of facts as held by Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Shri Umesh Saboo prop of Shruti Gems and in the case of M/s Naman Gems Pvt Ltd (ii) holding that the purchases

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment year of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of search under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

seizure\naction of the appellant on the issue on which the addition has been made in the\nassessment order.\n\n2. AO’s View:\n\n2.1 During the course of search proceedings, it was observed that the assessee\nhad obtained unsecured loans from various persons. As recorded by the Ld. AO\nin para 5.2 of the assessment order, the statement

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

bogus bills during the\ncourse of search operation on this person, (iii) holding that the purchases\nof Rs. 1,86,209/-, made from above named concerns, is unverifiable and\nunder invoiced to show more profit to claim the deduction u/s 80HHC, (iv)\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 1,86,209/- being 25% of purchases

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA BANKA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

seizure\naction on the appellant and therefore, the addition has been made without\nthe basis / source of incriminating material unearthed from the search\naction.\nThe bench noted that the assessee has supported the transaction by\nstating that there was no ban in purchasing & selling shares of 'Anax.com' /\n'Yamini Investments' at the time when the assessee entered in purchases &\nsales