BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

4 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Bogus/Accommodation Entryclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi59Mumbai21Kolkata13Surat4Bangalore4Jaipur4Ahmedabad2Raipur2Agra2

Key Topics

Section 14815Section 14711Bogus Purchases3Reassessment3Addition to Income3Bogus/Accommodation Entry3Reopening of Assessment3Section 145(3)2Section 143

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 516/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment was not valid. CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. &Ors. (2012) 68 DTR 38 (Del) (HC) Where the AO acted mechanically on the information supplied by the Directorate of the IT (Inv.) about the alleged bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies, without applying his own mind, he was not justified in invoking jurisdiction u/s 147

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

2
Section 682
Survey u/s 133A2
ITA 515/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment was not valid. CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. &Ors. (2012) 68 DTR 38 (Del) (HC) Where the AO acted mechanically on the information supplied by the Directorate of the IT (Inv.) about the alleged bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies, without applying his own mind, he was not justified in invoking jurisdiction u/s 147

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

ITA 1383/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

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:

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies, without applying his own mind, he was not justified in invoking jurisdiction u/s 147. Hence, the reopening of assessment only at the instance of Investigation Wing, Mumbai and that too on vague reasons is illegal and bad in law. In this connection it is further submitted that the department is only relying

ITO, JAIPUR vs. ALOOK FINETRADE P LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, ground no.2 taken by the assessee company is allowed

ITA 180/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 May 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

bogus/accommodation entries. Therefore, the addition made by the AO at the threshold is liable to be quashed. Apart from the decisions already submitted before the CIT(A), reliance is further placed on Supreme Court decision dated 02.09.2015 in case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE 127 DTR 0241 wherein it was held that denial of opportunity to the assessee