DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.453/Jp/2024 On The Following Grounds; “(I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,33,606/- Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Has Shown Bogus Purchase Of Rs 1,73,34,424/- During The Year From A Bogus Concern. 3

254 in case of Shri Jatin Hariyani (2007) XXXVII T.W. 116 in case of Vaibhav Gems Ltd. ; Vivek Kala Vs. ACIT (2007) XXXVIII T.W. 65 S.M. Company Vs. ACIT (2007) XXXVIII T.W. 236, Euro Jewels Vs. ACIT (2008) XXXIX T.W. 105 has upheld the above legal views 12 ITA No. 453/JP/2024 DCIT vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya and purchases supported with

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

SHRI SUNDER DAS SONKIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1383/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sunder Das Sonkia, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Sonkia Bhawan, Sms, Highway, Ward-1(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Akhps 7413 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 09/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 I.T.O., Cuke Shri Sunder Das Sonkhiya, Vs. Ward-1(2), Prop.- M/S Naveen Jewellers, Jaipur. Sonkhiya Bhawan, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur. Pan No.: Akhps 7413 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri S.R. Sharma (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeal Filed By The Assessee & The Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Arise Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur Dated 08/11/2019 For The A.Y. 2010-11. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee & The Revenue Are As Under:

254 and in case of Shri JatinHariyani (2007) XXXVII T.W. 116 had upheld the above legal views and purchases supported with similar documents as furnished by assessee in assessment proceedings were held as genuine and not bogus. However, the A.O. for made disallowance of 25% of alleged purchases of Rs. 11,60,43,873/- by relying on judgement in case

VIKAS DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CEN CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Actual Hearing Of The Case.”

Section 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 22.11.2019. 2 Vikas Dugar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-02, Jaipur 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds:- “1. That the Ld CIT(Appeals), has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition

DESIGN CORE,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

254 (iii) CIT vs. M.K. Brothers (1986) 52 CTR (Guj) 228 : (1987) 163 ITR 249 (Guj) (iv) CIT v. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (2013) 216 Taxman 171 (Mag.) (Bom.)(HC) Sale to government department-Alleged bogus purchases-Sales not doubted, merely because suppliers not appeared before the Assessing Officer or Commissioner (Appeals), purchases cannot be disallowed. (v) Rajesh

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. GUPTA EMERALD MINES PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue appeal is dismissed

254. She has relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. On the other hand, ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that no incriminating document was found during search and seizure operation in the case of the assessee to show that the assessee has claimed bogus purchases. The stand of the AO regarding accommodation entries is not based

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)

section 68 of the 51 Peeyush Agarwal, Jaipur. Act that will amount to double taxation once as sales and again as unexplained cash credit which is against the principles of taxation. Assessee was having only one source of income from trading in beedi, tea power and pan masala and therefore provisions of section 115BBE of the Act will have

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bogus Long Term Capital Gain/Loss to the beneficiaries; by receiving cash and the purchase and sale of share was done to route the unaccounted income into legal money. The financials of the company for the relevant period do not show any substantial change to support by financial fundamentals of the company. Both purchase and sale of the shares are concentrated

HARISH SHARMA HUF,B-1, PATODIYA MARG, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

bogus LTCG and in this list name of the company is appearing at Sr. No. 69. The ld. DR further based on that report submitted that in the script CRESSANDA SOLUTIONS LTD total trade of Rs. 12,73,18,95,395/- have been done and the companies involved in the purchase and sale for making this much transactions

SHREE ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 145(3) of I.T. Act, 1961 and also found that the assessee did not maintain the quality and quality details of stock. He applied 25% income on unverifiable of Rs. 22,61,216/- at Rs. 5,65,304/-. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT (A) relying on the findings in course of survey and search by the BCTT Wingh

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

254(4) along with the necessary provisions of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. This was with regard to the proposition that the respondent before the Tribunal, though he may not have appealed, may support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him. Not only that the provisions of rules

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. JAMMU METALLIC OXIDES PRIVATE LIMITED, 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

M/S. JAMMU METALLIC OXIDES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. JAMMU METALLIC OXIDES PRIVATE LIMITED, 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES 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