M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

143(3) of the Act. If such an order is already in existence, having obviously been passed prior to the initiation of the search/requisition, the Assessing Officer is empowered to reopen those proceedings and reassess the total income, taking note to the undisclosed income, if any, unearthed during the search. For this purpose, the fetters imposed upon the Assessing Officer

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

bogus LTCG and in our case the information related to the purchases which has already been accepted in the assessment completed u/s 143(3). A. Varshit& Co. Addition was made u/s In our case, reassessment proceedings Mumbai ITAT 143(3) for unverifiable were initiated after completion of purchases by applying NP assessment u/s 143(3) by invoking section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHIV VEGPRO PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

bogus concerns of Bhanwar Lal Jain & Group.” Thus it is clear that the reopening of the assessment is based on the information received and to assess the income in respect of the purchases made by the assessee which was examined by the AO during the original 21 M/s. Shiv Vegpro Pvt. Ltd., Kota. scrutiny assessment under section 143(3

JEWELS EMPORIUM A LEGACY,JAIPUR vs. ACIT,CC-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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

143(3) r.w.s. 153(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not in consonance with directions of Hon’ble ITAT and thus liable to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 11,11,976/- being 15% of purchase

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMPTIONS,CIRCLE,JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

143(3)/153B(1b) of the IT Act on 31.03.2015. Copy of order is placed on paper book page no. 1 to 5. During the course of original assessment proceedings the assessee has submitted all the necessary documents including receipt & payment account, balance sheet, list of debtors, list of creditors, loans & advances and thereafter the assessment was completed. The assessee

M/S. VAIBHAV GLOBAL (GEMS) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals for the A

bogus purchases and consequently the income assessable to tax has escaped assessment. Similarly, for the A.Y. 2010- 11, assessment was completed U/s 143(3) of the Act and thereafter the A.O. issued notice U/s 148 of the Act on 10/11/2017 respectively. The return of income filed for the A.Y. 2011-12 was processed U/s 143

M/S. VAIBHAV GLOBAL (GEMS) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals for the A

bogus purchases and consequently the income assessable to tax has escaped assessment. Similarly, for the A.Y. 2010- 11, assessment was completed U/s 143(3) of the Act and thereafter the A.O. issued notice U/s 148 of the Act on 10/11/2017 respectively. The return of income filed for the A.Y. 2011-12 was processed U/s 143

M/S. VAIBHAV GLOBAL (GEMS) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals for the A

bogus purchases and consequently the income assessable to tax has escaped assessment. Similarly, for the A.Y. 2010- 11, assessment was completed U/s 143(3) of the Act and thereafter the A.O. issued notice U/s 148 of the Act on 10/11/2017 respectively. The return of income filed for the A.Y. 2011-12 was processed U/s 143

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S KOTA DALL MILL, KOTA

bogus share capital gain. The order of the CIT (A), affirmed by the ITAT, deleting the addition, was not interfered with." ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. 59. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court referred to the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Jai Steel (India) v. Asstt. CIT [2013] 36 taxmann.com 523/219 Taxman

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

bogus share capital gain. The order of the CIT (A), affirmed by the ITAT, deleting the addition, was not interfered with." ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. 59. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court referred to the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Jai Steel (India) v. Asstt. CIT [2013] 36 taxmann.com 523/219 Taxman

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

bogus share capital gain. The order of the CIT (A), affirmed by the ITAT, deleting the addition, was not interfered with." ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. 59. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court referred to the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Jai Steel (India) v. Asstt. CIT [2013] 36 taxmann.com 523/219 Taxman

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

bogus share capital gain. The order of the CIT (A), affirmed by the ITAT, deleting the addition, was not interfered with." ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. 59. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court referred to the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Jai Steel (India) v. Asstt. CIT [2013] 36 taxmann.com 523/219 Taxman

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.

3). However, since the assessee was engaged in corresponding sales, the AO has disallowed an amount of Rs. 8,77,442/- being 25% of alleged bogus purchases. 5.6 As can be seen, information was available before the AO as given by DGIT (inv) Mumbai, which demonstrated that the suppliers from whom the appellant claimed to have effected purchases are providing

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

143(3)/ 147 of the Act on 22.12.2016 on assessed income at Rs. 3,56,88,870/- as against returned income of Rs. 1,40,350/-. Sh. Manoj Amarchand Tailor, Bijainagar Vs.ITO, Ward-1, Beawar 2.5 Necessary copies of relevant documents i.e. Transfer Memo dated 31.05.2014, ITR filed for A.Y. 2017-18 and jurisdiction notification (as supra) with regard

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

143(3)/ 147 of the Act on 22.12.2016 on assessed income at Rs. 3,56,88,870/- as against returned income of Rs. 1,40,350/-. Sh. Manoj Amarchand Tailor, Bijainagar Vs.ITO, Ward-1, Beawar 2.5 Necessary copies of relevant documents i.e. Transfer Memo dated 31.05.2014, ITR filed for A.Y. 2017-18 and jurisdiction notification (as supra) with regard

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 145(3) is illegal and unjustified and deserves to be quashed. Ground No. 1 : That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT (A) has erred seriously on facts in sustaining the action of the ld. AO in considering purchases of a sum of Rs. 3,21,93,468 made from 11 parties as bogus

M/S G.B. IMPEX ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-4, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

bogus transaction and finally made an addition of 25% of such purchases. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has estimated the income of the assessee in the reassessment order passed U/s 143(3) read with Section

M/S G.B. IMPEX ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5-3, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

bogus transaction and finally made an addition of 25% of such purchases. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has estimated the income of the assessee in the reassessment order passed U/s 143(3) read with Section