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 , 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

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

ITO, WARD-2, HANUMANGARH vs. SMT. LALITA SARAF , HANUMANGARH TOWN

In the result, the appeals of the Department are dismissed and the Cross objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Sainithe Income Tax Officer, Vs Smt. Lalita Saraf, Ward-2, Hanumangarh C/O Mangi Lal Saraf, In Front Of Mandi Studio, Hanumangarh Town

Section 268A of the Income-tax Act 1961.” 7. From Clause 12 & 13 of the above said circular it is clear that these instructions are applicable to the pending appeals also and as per clause 13, there is clear cut instruction to the department to withdraw or not to press the appeals filed before the ITAT wherein tax effect

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA, BHILWARA vs. M/S. SAMARPAN SYNTHETICS PVT. LTD. , BHILWARA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwala.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Samarpan Synthetics Pvt. Circle, Ltd., Bhilwara 54, Bhilwara Textiles Market, Pur Road, Bhilwara-311001, Rahasthan. Pan No. Aahcs 4365 G

bogus entities and never produced complete details and books of accounts before the AO while deleting addition of Rs.7,82,95,551/-. Ld. DR also submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had also erred in accepting the verbal contention of the assessee that purchase of Rs.10,00,68,034/- were bifurcated in the name of seven parties to obtain loan

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

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, BIKANER vs. M/S. MANOJ KUMAR VIPIN KUMAR , BIKANER

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwala.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Manoj Kumar Vipin Kumar, Central Circle, 118, New Dhan Mandi, Bikaner. Bikaner. Pan No. Aarfm 0027 E

1 may be referred which have distinguished the decision of McDowells & Co. vs. CTO 154 ITR 148. 10. We also observe that the determination of income of Rs. 2,43,59,629/- made by the AO is hypothetical by assuming that assessee has sold 2236.50 quintals of Gwar on 13.02.2012 @ Rs. 14,000/- per quintal. There is no basis

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