SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS , UDAIPU

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

11 12 2011- 2012- 126/Jodh/2021 10098959/ 252474/- 229751/- 4,82,225/- 12 13 - 2012- 2013- 127/Jodh/2021 3273595/- 81840/- 70374/- 1,52,164/ 13 14 5. Against this assessee has filed appeal before the Honble CIT(A). The assessee has filed WS and details by stating that During the course of assessment proceedings, I have filed the Form 27C duly signed

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

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

11 12 2011- 2012- 126/Jodh/2021 10098959/ 252474/- 229751/- 4,82,225/- 12 13 - 2012- 2013- 127/Jodh/2021 3273595/- 81840/- 70374/- 1,52,164/ 13 14 5. Against this assessee has filed appeal before the Honble CIT(A). The assessee has filed WS and details by stating that During the course of assessment proceedings, I have filed the Form 27C duly signed

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

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

11 12 2011- 2012- 126/Jodh/2021 10098959/ 252474/- 229751/- 4,82,225/- 12 13 - 2012- 2013- 127/Jodh/2021 3273595/- 81840/- 70374/- 1,52,164/ 13 14 5. Against this assessee has filed appeal before the Honble CIT(A). The assessee has filed WS and details by stating that During the course of assessment proceedings, I have filed the Form 27C duly signed

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.

1,11,60,612/-in respect of alleged 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

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

purchase By Commission Wheat Journal 44 1,00,42,400.00 flour sales To Commission Journal 45 50,212.00 Sanjay Rathi HUF Journal 46 9,85,596 By MUDAT Journal 48 1,83,808.00 1,02,26,208.00 1,02,26,208.00 The whole scenarios show that the fund repaid by the assessee to the above concerns was again received back

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

11. In this context, we have noted that the reasons proceeded on two fundamental\ngrounds. One, that the property in question was sold for a sum of Rs. 1,18,95,000/- and\ntwo; that the assessee had not filed the return and that therefore his 1/3rd share out of the\nsale proceeds was not offered to tax. Both these

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

11. Now, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 in ITA No. 167,168 & 169/Jodh/2022. In all three appeals ground no 1 is general in nature and no specific arguments were raised. Therefore, on the said ground no 1 no adjudication is required. 12. Ground

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

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

bogus purchase issue wherein the additions have been upheld in principle even when the books of accounts have not been rejected. In this regard the following judgment is also hereby referred to wherein the addition has been upheld even where the books of accounts were not rejected. Case referred Shree Krishan Kripa Feeds v/s CIT, Karnal 101 Taxman.com

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

bogus purchase issue wherein the additions have been upheld in\nprinciple even when the books of accounts have not been rejected. In this regard the\nfollowing judgment is also hereby referred to wherein the addition has been upheld even\nwhere the books of accounts were not rejected.\nCase referred Shree Krishan Kripa Feeds v/s CIT, Karnal 101 Taxman.com

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