ACIT, PAOTA C ROAD vs. VARAHA INFRA LIMITED, PAOTA B ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaithe Acit Vs M/S. Vardha Infra Ltd. Room No. 215, Aayakar Bhawan 6 Jalam Vilas Scheme Paota C Road, Jodhpur Paota B Road, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv 7972 K

purchases, closing stock details, led to the legitimate Inference that the books/supporting evidences/bills vouchers had not been properly particularly when there was a steep fall in net profit rate, in the year under consideration there was loss of 6.97% of receipts whereas in the immediately preceding year the assessce had declared net profit at 7.23% of receipts 5.5 In view

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

business income. The judgements cited by the appellant are in the context where the addition was not clear and was ambiguous. Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. 8. On the above two issues that the books of accounts have not been rejected and the section has not been mentioned in the assessment order it is submitted that no prejudice has been

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

business income. The\njudgements cited by the appellant are in the context where the addition was not clear and\nwas ambiguous.\n18\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\n8. On the above two issues that the books of accounts have not been rejected and the section\nhas not been mentioned in the assessment order

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDIAPUR, UDAIPUE

business income. The\njudgements cited by the appellant are in the context where the addition was not clear and\nwas ambiguous.18\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\n8. On the above two issues that the books of accounts have not been rejected and the section\nhas not been mentioned in the assessment order it is submitted

M/S BHAGIRATH DAIRY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGAUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NAGAUR

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

purchase deed as well as khasragirdawari is available on paper book page no. 167 to 184. It is further submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, in response to summon u/s 131, the depositor had furnished a written reply, stating that her capital was of Rs. 2,45,55,802/-, which included bank FDRs, jewellery, land etc. Reply

PUKHRAJ KUNDANMAL SHAH,JODHPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon'Ble

Income tax Act and that the VAT authority had treated such purchases and sales as genuine. The books of account have been maintained in the regular course of business and cash deposits in the books of account are duly accounted for in the books of account. The lower authorities allegation of non- maintenance of stock register is factually incorrect while

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. WAGAD CONSTRUTION COMPANY, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

business, Ready Mix Concrete Manufacturing and allied activities. The assessee filed return of income on 23.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 29,02,210/-. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 20.12.2014. Thereafter the case was selected for scrutiny. During the course of assessment, the AO found from

RACHNA GOYAL,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

income from business and other sources. Information received from DDIT (Inv.) Ahmedabad regarding a search operation in the case of Jignesh Shah and Sanjay Shah revealed evidence of unaccounted cash and bogus Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG). An investigation into the assessee's transactions showed purchase

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PAOTA C ROAD vs. HRDK BULLION AND REFINERY PRIVATE LIMITED, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Ble

PURCHASE-FINISHED GOODS/STOCK IN TRADE INDIRECT INCOME 5993701.0 50937010 5551520 PURCHAS 384444911 8856011 201611435 0 61 61 TO GROSS PROFIL 16198537 10404657 BCLOSING STOCK CRUSHER COOOS 22707686 22797686. 12775431 412319067 220098329 TOTAL 412319067 220098329 10 67 SON' 4. The assessing officer in its Assessment order has stated that "Futther, looking to the business trend of the assessee there is abnormal

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.

bogus sales. 18. It has been discussed as above that the assessee company is engaged in the business of trading and manufacturing of edible oil etc. and that the assessee had furnished complete detailed information and evidences such as the sales, books, sale bill, purchase books, purchases bills, stock register, bank statement, etc. in compliance to various quarries raised

ISLAUDDIN,JODHPUR vs. ITO-PHALODI, PHALODI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

purchases and\ncorresponding sales made are recorded in the books of the assessee, and no doubts\nwhatsoever have been expressed in this regard by the AO.\nAnother gross mistake committed by the AO is that on one hand he is disbelieving the\nopening balance of debtors of Rs.18 lakhs while on the other hand, he is making an\naddition

DCIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA vs. SHRI PRAHALAD RAI RATHI, BHILWARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmithe Dcit Vs Shri Prahalad Rai Rathi Circle Prop: M/S.Kedar Mal Radhey Shyam, Bhiwlara Sadar Bazar, Gulabpura, Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adxpr 0949 R

business relation with these companies and fund transferred to M/s India Nivesh Securities Pvt. Ltd were received from these companies. The assessee has also claimed that funds so received from these companies were repaid during the year itself. Form the balance sheet it is very clear that the assessee booked loss of Rs.1,63,29,629/- in trading of shares

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

income disclosed therein after taking into consideration the purchases made from the appellant. In view of these reasons, the contention of the appellant that there is no loss to the revenue on account of non-collection of TCS by her since the relevant sales have been duly credited in her books which have been audited by a Chartered Accountant

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

income disclosed therein after taking into consideration the purchases made from the appellant. In view of these reasons, the contention of the appellant that there is no loss to the revenue on account of non-collection of TCS by her since the relevant sales have been duly credited in her books which have been audited by a Chartered Accountant

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS , UDAIPU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

income disclosed therein after taking into consideration the purchases made from the appellant. In view of these reasons, the contention of the appellant that there is no loss to the revenue on account of non-collection of TCS by her since the relevant sales have been duly credited in her books which have been audited by a Chartered Accountant

ITO, WARD, PHALODI, PHALODI vs. M/S RAMA ALLURE LLP, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Date, The Appeal Is Finally Heard.”

Bogus. The AO has arbitrarily without making any inquiry has doubted the identity of the Dubai Bank accounts & declared as ‘Undisclosed’. Also, the Ld. AO without assigning any strong reason or document evidence the audited financial statements of Aptus Trading DMCC and simply declared the funds provided by Mr. Arpit to Mr. Suresh as not explained. 9. It would

MANGILAL DATLA,BANSWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD BANSWARA, BANSWARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, both on legal issue\nas well as on facts

business turnover to undisclosed\nbank account—CIT(A) calculated profit on account of undisclosed sales, credit in bank account\nand accordingly worked out addition and directed Assessing Officer that while computing\nincome of assessee-Held, Assessing Officer recorded that assessee filed return in his return of\nincome and revised return of income, as \"It was also noted by undersigned that

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

income of the appellant. (iii) Before me, the Ld. AR of the appellant has contended that the Ld. AO has made the addition on the basis of his findings given in the assessment order for AY 2011-12 wherein similar additions on account of suppression of X-ray receipts was made. It was brought to my notice that in first