ITO, JAIPUR vs. ALOOK FINETRADE P LTD, JAIPUR

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

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

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:

68 DTR 38 (Del.) (HC) He further submitted that 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. Hence, the reopening of assessment only at the instance of Investigation Wing

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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. S.P Agarwalla alias Sukhdeo Prasad AgarwallaVs.ITO 104 ITR 1040 (Kol.)(HC) It is held that mere

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

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. S.P Agarwalla alias Sukhdeo Prasad AgarwallaVs.ITO 104 ITR 1040 (Kol.)(HC) It is held that mere