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)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, by ACIT, circle-1, Jaipur. 2 Shri Khandelwal Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds:- “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred seriously on facts in sustaining the action of the ld. AO in considering purchases

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)

142(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee on 30.08.2018, 06.10.2018 & 10.10.2018 requiring the details/information. In response, the AR of the assessee filed his submission dated 15.10.2018 and main content of the same is as under:- "As regards the issue of alleged bogus/un-verifiable purchases it is respectfully submitted that in assessee's case there is no issue

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)

purchase and consequently sale as bogus and made addition of Rs 44,61,000/-. Deposit in the bank account during the demonetization period. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

bogus expenses and by\nusing the money of trust by taking the various advances. However, it is further cleared\nthat Honble Apex Court in three recent decision namely Ahmedabad developmental\nauthority 143 taxman 278, New Nobel Education 143 taxman 246, and Baba Banda\nBahadur Civil Appeal No. 10511 of 2013, had made remarkable change, where the theory\nof dominant objects

LATE SHRI JITENDRA NAGAR THROUGH HIS L/R SMT. DEEPIKA NAGAR,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD BARAN, BARAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

Section 148 for AY 2015-16 is invalid, rendering the subsequent assessment proceedings null and void. 4.7 Hon’ble ITAT, Raipur Bench in the case of DCIT v. Vinay Agrawal[2025] 2 TMI 891 order dated 17.02.2025after considering theaforesaid judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra) has held: Reopening of assessment - Period of limitation - Bogus purchases

SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEEMUCH vs. THE PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

bogus purchases as compared to G.P. on normal purchases In the present case also, since the ld. AO has examined the profit worked out on unaccounted purchases and has accepted such working prepared by assessee by observing that : “It is also submitted that assessee company has now offered the additional undisclosed income based on GP rate of its business activity

DURGA PRASAD SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

3 Durga Prasad Sharma vs. ITO purchases for the beneficiary) A list of beneficiary is provided by the department for the F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19. The assessee is one of the beneficiary among them and obtained entries in the form of bogus purchases without actual supply of goods of Rs.89,03,956/-. During the year assessee

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)

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 are that the assessee

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

142(1) of the Act annexing questionnaire has been issued to the assessee on 07.08.2019 fixing the date for furnishing submission by 13.08.2019. In response, the assessee did not file any reply. 4. During the assessment proceeding based on the information available with the AO which in turn based from the investigation report of ADIT(INV) unit-3(2) Kolkata

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

142(1) after lapse of\n256 days on 10.12.2022 and required very lengthy details with\nevidences for which the assessee filed submission on the IT Portal\n12\nITA NOP. 209/JPR/2025\nJAJOO RASHMI REFRACTORIES LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR\nAAACJ8517G-JAJOO RASHMI REFRACTORIES PRIVATE LIMITED\nΑ.Υ. 2018-19\nITBA/AST/S/147/2022-23/1051546840(1)\nPage 3\nof approximately 400 pages. Thereafter, again

SATYA NARAYAN ,BHARATPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1434/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Satya Narayan बनाम Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/s Shiv Charan Lal Satya Vs. Ward -1, Narayan, Navin Mandi Yard, Nadbai, Bharatpur Bharatpur स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAPPN9055M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Ashish Khandelwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue by: Sh. Anup Singh

section 143(3) r.w.s. 2 Satya Narayan vs. ITO 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short “Act”] by National Faceless Assessment Unit [ for short AO ]. 2. The assessee has assailed the present appeal on the following grounds: - 1. That the Ld. AO has erred in law as well in facts in passing order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B

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)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, by DCIT, Circle-02, Jaipur. 2 Abhay Chordia vs. DCIT 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining disallowance of Rs. 74,402/- in regard to employees contribution to PF and ESI deposited by the appellant within the due date

GOYAL VEGOILS LIMITED ,KASAR ,KOTA vs. DCIT , CIRCLE -2, KOTA

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 148 with respect to the issue of sale transaction made with M/s Shri Ram Trading Company, and every time entire opening stock, sales , purchase and closing stock made during the year stood accepted. Accordingly the opening and closing stock and trading accounts including sales and purchase had not been disturbed. In these circumstances, it can be said that

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

142 may be invoked and such case shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (7). (2) The faceless assessment under sub-section (1) shall be made in respect of such territorial area, or persons or class of persons, or incomes or class of incomes, or cases or class of cases, as may be specified

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

Bench: Him.

142(1) along with questionnaire dated 11.11.2019 was issued to the assessee electronically for filling the reply/details on 15.11.2019. In response to the notice so issued, the assessee filed all the details on the ITBA portal which was verified by the ld. AO. On going through the details so filed ld. AO noted that the assessee deposited cash

ABHISHEK KHANDELWAL,AJMER vs. ITO WD-2(2), AJMER

purchase bills\netc were e-filed to A.O. & verified by him.\nThat the appeal was filed to CIT(A) & time to time submissions as called filed. The\necision of CIT(A) dated 26.10.2023 was received (Seen & viewed) on portal only on\nIND5.04.2024. thus it caused delay in filing the appeal & assessee request for\ncondonation of same since the delay cause

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)

3 Shri Prem Industries vs. ITO • M/s Shiv Agro Sales (GSTIN 08BBHPK0251N1Z6) As found by ld. Assessing Officer, source of payments for purchases worth Rs. 54,23,539/- through the first mentioned entity and purchases and source of payments for purchases worth Rs. 1,62,34,893/- said to have been made through 2nd mentioned entity remained unexplained. Learned Assessing

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

3. 07.03.2019 Information received 7-11 4. 19.03.2019 151 Proposal 12-23 Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur 5. 26.03.2019 24 Approval U/S 151 6. 26.03.2019 148 issued 25 7. 04.07.2019 26-27 142(1) issued no ITR was filed by assessee 8 04.09.2019 133(6) Shareen Hire Purchase 28-29 9. 04.09.2019 Darshan Enclave