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

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income Tax Act in the order under disputed. The details of\napproval, if any taken, have not mentioned

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

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income Tax Act in the order under disputed. The details of\napproval, if any taken, have not mentioned

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

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income Tax Act in the order under disputed. The details of\napproval, if any taken, have not mentioned

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

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section\n153D of Income Tax Act in the order under disputed. The details of\napproval, if any taken, have not mentioned

RAVI HALDIA,HALDIA MULTIPOINT HOUSE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly

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

bogus purchases but the issue is in regard to purchases made in the regular course of business but some of the purchases could not be got verified mainly on account of non availability of correct postal address of few sellers at that point of time, i.e. in AY 2004-05. However confirmed copy of statement of account of the seller

RAVI HALDIA,C/O HALDIA MULTIPOINT HOUSE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly

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

bogus purchases but the issue is in regard to purchases made in the regular course of business but some of the purchases could not be got verified mainly on account of non availability of correct postal address of few sellers at that point of time, i.e. in AY 2004-05. However confirmed copy of statement of account of the seller

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

section\n145(3). The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of\nthe case. Relief may please be granted by accepting books of accounts.\n\n7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in, confirming the\naction of the ld. AO, in making addition

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.”

Bogus purchases - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, as per facts of the case, dates of the notices issued and the decision in the case of Kachrulal Jitendra Kuma [2025 (2) TMI 865 - ITAT RAIPUR] we find that the issue in the present case is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. Evidently, under the facts and circumstances of the present case

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable to such assessment year. Assessment of income of any other person. 153C

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action\nof the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may\nplease be granted by quashing the said disallowance of Rs. 12,16,500.\n63\nITA No. 331/JPR/2017 & 435 to 440/JPR/2018\nITA No. 467,468 & 352/JPR/2018 & 145 & 151/JPR/2024\n4. The assessee

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action\nof the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may\nplease be granted by quashing the said disallowance of Rs. 12,16,500.\n==End of OCR page 63==\n4. The assessee company craves its right to add, amend

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

bogus creditors. It is seen that in the case of 'G' the amounts of Rs. 14,01,013, Rs. 13,28,813, Rs. 17,53,813 and Rs. 14,70,413 during year ending 31-3-1997, 31-3- 1998, 31-3-1999 and 31-3-2000 respectively were shown as sundry creditors. First of all, it is not possible

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

bogus creditors. It is seen that in the case of 'G' the amounts of Rs. 14,01,013, Rs. 13,28,813, Rs. 17,53,813 and Rs. 14,70,413 during year ending 31-3-1997, 31-3- 1998, 31-3-1999 and 31-3-2000 respectively were shown as sundry creditors. First of all, it is not possible

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

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

153B shall be either 18 months from the end of FY in which the search took place (i.e. on 30.09.2020) or 12 months from the end of the FY in which the seized records were received (i.e. on 31.03.2020). Hence, the latter date comes to 30.09.2020. Thus,the last date for completing all the subjected assessments was 30.09.2020only. Accordingly

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

153B of the Act of 1961. The\nrespondent authority was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under section 153C of\nthe Act of 1961 would be barred by limitation, therefore, recourse was taken to the\nprovisions contained in Section 148 and Section 148A of the Act of 1961 which has no\napplication in the present cases.\n18\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025

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

153B of the Act of 1961. The\nrespondent authority was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under section 153C of\nthe Act of 1961 would be barred by limitation, therefore, recourse was taken to the\nprovisions contained in Section 148 and Section 148A of the Act of 1961 which has no\napplication in the present cases.\n18\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

153B of the Act of 1961. The respondent authority was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under section 153C of the Act of 1961 would be barred by limitation, therefore, recourse was taken to the provisions contained in Section 148 and Section 148A of the Act of 1961 which has no application in the present cases. DCIT vs. Sapna

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

153B of the Act of 1961. The\nrespondent authority was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under section 153C of\nthe Act of 1961 would be barred by limitation, therefore, recourse was taken to the\nprovisions contained in Section 148 and Section 148A of the Act of 1961 which has no\napplication in the present cases.\n\n18\nITA