ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

9. Apropos to the ground no. 1 the bench observed that the assessment year under consideration is A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has filed the return of income for the year on 28.08.2017 and as on the date of search time limit to issue the notice u/s. 143(2) was not expired and therefore, ground no. 1 raised

KAVITA RATHORE,JAIPUR vs. ITO (TDS), UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS u/s 194IA of the Act. Accordingly, the AO treated the appellant as assessee in default u/s 201(1) for failure to deduct tax and also 4 Jai International, Udaipur charged interest u/s 201(1A) of the Act. The total tax of Rs. 47,037/- u/s 201(1) and interest Rs. 43,274/- u/s 201(1A) of the Act were

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

SHRI BHERU LAL GARG,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS), Udaipur, (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 206C (6) /206C (6A) and 206C (7) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 159 to 166/Jodh/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2016-17 2 2. At the outset, we advert that all the appeals are common and have a same nature of fact. Therefore, all the appeals are taken together, heard together

LAKHPAT TRADING AND INDUSTRYS PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelakhpat Trading & Acit, Circle-3 Industryspvt. Ltd. Jodhpur G-72/73 79/80, 1St Phase, Boranada, Jodhpur - 342001 Pan No. Aaccl 5668 C Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Smt. Runi Pal, Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2017-18 Challenging Therein The Rejection Of Its Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3), Estimation Of Income & Reducing Genuine Sales.

9. The comparative pattern of trading history is as under: - F.Y. Turnover G.P. G.P. Rate N.P. N.P. Rate (%) (%) 2013-14 145691731.00 6947272.00 4.77 -2087004.00 -1.43 2014-15 432166331.85 36109574.76 8.36 1676247.72 0.39 2015-16 1046959136.02 42813001.26 4.09 115886.56 0.01 2016-17 1853540666.00 43679809.41 2.36 6434228.00 0.35 10. It is relevant to mention here that there was slight fall