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

138 .49 0.00 0.00 29,056.85 3,57,081.65 B) Stock position (from 03.11.2016 to 08.11.2016) by excluding the goods purchased from Girdhar Jewellers Private Limited in Stock quantity: - Name of Item Unit Opening Purchase Mfg(Net) Sales (-) Closing Stock (+) (+) (+) Stock (=) Gold Ornaments 22 Kt Gms 3,20,666.92 0.00 0.00 29,056.85 2,91,610.07 Thus if the quantity

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

138 taxmann.com 19 (Madhya Pradesh)/[2022) 286 Taxman 680 (Madhya Pradesh)/[2022) 446 ITR 539 (Madhya Pradeshj[18-02-2022), the decision of the Hon'ble High Court upheld the order of the Hon'ble ITAT whereby the addition made on the basis of financial statement submitted to bank was confirmed. SLP against this judgement was dismissed

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

138 taxmann.com 19 (Madhya Pradesh)/[2022) 286 Taxman 680 (Madhya Pradesh)/[2022) 446 ITR 539 (Madhya Pradeshj[18-02-2022), the decision of the Hon'ble High Court upheld the order of the Hon'ble ITAT whereby the addition made on the basis of financial statement submitted to bank was confirmed. SLP against this judgement was dismissed

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)

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure - Allowability of (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

BIRENDRA SINGH NIRBHAY,SIRSI ROAD JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3(1) JAIPUR, NCRB INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

purchase and sale details reflect a lack of fundamental\njustification for such extraordinary gains.\niii.\nThe assessee's assertion of “deep study” and reliance on hearsay and\nrumours is found to be absurd, as prudent investment decisions are not\nbased on speculation but on sound financial analysis.\n6. Adverse Findings and Penalties:\ni.\nThe Assessing Officer (AO) concluded that

KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

purchases of shares, then the amount received by the company\nwould be regarded as a application receipt.\n4. 397 ITR 136 CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Bom)\n[DOD:05.07.2017]\nCash Credits\nCompany Share application money Issuance of shares\nGenuineness and creditworthiness of persons allotted shares proved by assessee\nNon-appearance of such parties before Assessing Officer irrelevant – Deletion

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

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure - Allowability of (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

SIYARAM CITY CABS LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITD WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

bogus purchase, without discharging his onus of providing copy of the statements of persons and material relied upon by him The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the addition of Rs.6,56,44,910’’. 2.1 At the outset of hearing

SUMIT GOEL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

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

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

purchase of shares as well as realization of sale proceeds and crediting the same to the bank account of the assessee. Hence, CIT(A)’s order in deleting the additions made by the AO is not infirm in any way requiring any interference. 6. Latest decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court is in favor of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, SIKAR, SIKAR vs. PRADEEP KUMAR AGARWAL, SIKAR

Bench: Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.

section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2021-22. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :- 1. The ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 9,60,01,182/- by treating the purchases made by the assessee from Shri Parshottam Agarwal, Jagdamba Enterprises

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

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

138 taxmann.com 19 (Madhya Pradesh)/[2022) 286\nTaxman 680 (Madhya Pradesh)/[2022) 446 ITR 539 (Madhya\nPradeshj[18-02-2022), the decision of the Hon'ble High Court upheld the\norder of the Hon'ble ITAT whereby the addition made on the basis of\nfinancial statement submitted to bank was confirmed. SLP against this\njudgement was dismissed

MADAN MOHAN GUPTA ,KOTA vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , KOTA

section 68.\n1.31As the issue involved is of chargeability of long term capital gain as undisclosed\nincome of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act, it may be mentioned that many High\ncourts and ITAT benches have held in favour of the assessee. In one of the cases\n(CIT vs. Mukesh Ratilal Marolia) SLP filed by the Revenue against

ALOK KUMAR JAIN ,PEARL PLEASURE vs. ACIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, NEW CERNTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN,

Bench: Him.

bogus LTCG. Therefore, the same is assessed in the hands of the assessee as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of Section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the IT Act. 5.3.3 In respect of this ground, the appellant in his written submission made the following argument: 59. As stated in brief facts of the case that the Appellant purchased total

PAWAN GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO WARD 1(3) KOTA , KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

section 68.\n1.31As the issue involved is of chargeability of long term capital gain as undisclosed income of the\nassessee u/s 68 of the Act, it may be mentioned that many High courts and ITAT benches have\nheld in favour of the assessee. In one of the cases (CIT vs. Mukesh Ratilal Marolia) SLP\nfiled by the Revenue against

SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

purchases, sales and production of the Raw Material / Finished Goods and By Products and all other related transactions of the company in its books of accounts and which are audited too and the accounts are also already presented for your verification. Thus, the books of accounts cannot be rejected U/s 145(3) of the Income

SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

purchases, sales and production of the Raw Material / Finished Goods and By Products and all other related transactions of the company in its books of accounts and which are audited too and the accounts are also already presented for your verification. Thus, the books of accounts cannot be rejected U/s 145(3) of the Income

M/S SHRI SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTION P. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

purchases, sales and production of the Raw Material / Finished Goods and By Products and all other related transactions of the company in its books of accounts and which are audited too and the accounts are also already presented for your verification. Thus, the books of accounts cannot be rejected U/s 145(3) of the Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S BARAN ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD., KOTA

purchases and sales of Supari, Gutka and other items dealt by our firms is not entered and shown in the regular books of accounts maintained by our firms." 65. Therefore, there was a clear admission by the Assessees in Smt. Dayawanti Gupta (supra) there that they were not maintaining regular books of accounts and the transactions were not recorded therein