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.”

151 of the Act or whether the second section 148 notice was valid. 19. The impugned order holding that the said proceedings would continue is set aside. The proceedings commenced pursuant to the second section 148 notice are also set aside. 4.3 Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of ITO v. Sumitra Rajeshbhai Jain

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

151 and 153. 2.3. Section 147 and 153C are not interchangeable but are mutually exclusive sections. It is not the choice of the revenue to invoke either of the two sections at its whims. The scope of the two sections has been legislated differently with a definitive purpose. 2.4. Reliance is placed in the following decisions: a) Hon’ble ITAT

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

151 and 153. 2.3. Section 147 and 153C are not interchangeable but are mutually exclusive sections. It is not the choice of the revenue to invoke either of the two sections at its whims. The scope of the two sections has been legislated differently with a definitive purpose. 2.4. Reliance is placed in the following decisions: a) Hon’ble ITAT

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

151 of the Act. Copy of approval for passing order under section 148A(d), dated 22/25.7.2022, as per directions of Hon’ble Apex Court would reveal that said order was passed with the approval of the Principal Commissioner of Income tax-2, Jaipur. This fact also finds mention in Order under section 148A(d) of the Act issued

BHASKAR CHOUHAN,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SIKAR

purchases made\nagainst these sales nor rejected appellant's books of accounts.\n4.2.1 Section 69A stipulates that, Where in any financial year the\nassessee is found to be the owner of any money, bullion jewellery or\nother valuable article and such money, bullion, jewellery or valuable\narticle is not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, A person other than the person referred to in section 153A

SUVA LAL PAHARIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(3), JAIPUR

bogus\nentities-Tribunal allowed assessee's appeal on merits—Revenue appealed against appellate\norder on merits—Assessee's cross appeal was on correctness of reopening of assessment—\nTribunal upheld assessee's cross-objections and dismissed Revenue's appeal holding that there\nwas no proper application of mind by concerned sanctioning authority u/s Section 151 as a pre-\ncondition for issuing

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. HEM CHAND JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

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

bogus rather it support the case of the assessee that its transactions are genuine. 4. It is submitted that both purchase & sale of shares of Gini Silk Mills Ltd. are through Demat account, SEBI registered stock broker, through banking channel and nothing is brought on record by AO that transaction in these shares are accommodation entries. Neither the copy

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

Section 263 of the Act were proper and legal and the Tribunal committed a serious error in reversing such decisions. Mr. Arif Ali, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant in ITAT No. 44 of 2020 (Assessee-Gupta Agarwal) submitted that the facts which have been set out in the memorandum of appeal, is wholly incorrect and does not pertain

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

Section 263 of the Act were proper and legal and the Tribunal committed a serious error in reversing such decisions. Mr. Arif Ali, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant in ITAT No. 44 of 2020 (Assessee-Gupta Agarwal) submitted that the facts which have been set out in the memorandum of appeal, is wholly incorrect and does not pertain

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 145(3), consequential rejection of books of accounts of the assessee, treatment of purchases of Rs. 31,99,996/- made by the assessee from M/s. Sun Diam as not verifiable and consequential addition of Rs. 7,99,999/-, being 25% of above mentioned alleged unverifiable purchases of Rs. 31,99,996/-, and levy of tax thereon. In support

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

purchases and\nassessee is one of the beneficiaries who has carried out bogus transaction with\nM/s DRAIPL to the extent of Rs.6,46,31,000/- in the relevant assessment year\nand accordingly reached to the satisfaction that income to this extent has escaped\nassessment.\n\nFrom perusal of above, it is crystal clear that information, based on which notice\nu/s

SWAMI KESHWANAND SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-2, JAIPUR

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 309 & 310/Jp/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Cuke I.T.O. (Exemption), Vs. Sansthan, Ward-2, N.H.11, Bhadhadhar, Sikar-332315 Jaipur (Rajasthan). (Raj) Pan No.: Aafts 2816 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shafi Mohammed (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/04/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 17/09/2020 & 10/09/2020 For The A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively.

purchase of land. (vii) Sustaining the addition of Rs. 16,53,383/- on account of bogus creditors. (viii) Sustaining the Addition of Rs. 26,87,000/- on account of difference in advertisement expenses. 3 ITA 309 & 310/JP/2020_ Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Sansthan Vs ITO(E) (ix) Sustaining the act of Ld. Assessing Officer about the disallowance of exemption

SWAMI KESHWANAND SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-2, JAIPUR

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 309 & 310/Jp/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Cuke I.T.O. (Exemption), Vs. Sansthan, Ward-2, N.H.11, Bhadhadhar, Sikar-332315 Jaipur (Rajasthan). (Raj) Pan No.: Aafts 2816 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shafi Mohammed (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/04/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 17/09/2020 & 10/09/2020 For The A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively.

purchase of land. (vii) Sustaining the addition of Rs. 16,53,383/- on account of bogus creditors. (viii) Sustaining the Addition of Rs. 26,87,000/- on account of difference in advertisement expenses. 3 ITA 309 & 310/JP/2020_ Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Sansthan Vs ITO(E) (ix) Sustaining the act of Ld. Assessing Officer about the disallowance of exemption

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)

151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A

MERTA OIL MILLS COMPANY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

purchases from these parties and whether the same is reflected in the accounts or not. The Ld. CIT(A) held that it is a clerical error ignoring that recording of reasons is foundation for reopening of assessment and if the reasons recorded are wrong, incorrect or vague, all consequent proceeding are also illegal and invalid. This shows that AO mechanically

DAMODAR OIL MILLS COMPANY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

purchases from these parties and whether the same is reflected in the accounts or not. The Ld. CIT(A) held that it is a clerical error ignoring that recording of reasons is foundation for reopening of assessment and if the reasons recorded are wrong, incorrect or vague, all consequent proceeding are also illegal and invalid. This shows that AO mechanically

PANKAJ KUMAR MITTAL,DHOLPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4 BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, stands allowed

bogus purchases of amounting to Rs.26,76,210/-from the\ntwo entities Madan Lal Madho Prasad and M/sKalki Trading Company\namounting to Rs.15,51,210/- and Rs.11,25,000/- respectively.\nThe Humble appellant has filed his original return U/s 44AD showing his income\nas per\nprovisonsofIncomeTaxAct1961onDt29/08/2018andin\nresponseofNotice\nU/s 148 Return again filed U/s 44AD on Dt 29/04/2022\nThe Learned

KOSHAL KISHOR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(INTL. TAX.) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

bogus entities— Tribunal allowed assessee’s appeal on merits—Revenue appealed against appellate order on merits—Assessee’s cross appeal was on correctness of reopening of assessment—Tribunal upheld assessee’s cross-objections and dismissed Revenue’s appeal holding that there was no proper application of mind by concerned sanctioning authority u/s Section 151 as a pre-condition for issuing