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.

section 145(3) of the Act. Further, the estimation of gross profit made by the AO is justified and reasonable. The AO has estimated gross profits at 3% of the gross turnover, i.e, Rs. 185,35,46,666/-, which comes to Rs.5,56,06,219/-. After considering the already declared gross profit of Rs.4,36,79,809/-, the differential amount

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

CHAMPA LAL MEHTA ,SANCHORE vs. ITO WARD-2, JALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

bogus purchases and that to be on\nestimated basis, then no penalty can be levied u/s.271(1)(c).In view of that\nmatter, the impugned order is held to be infirm and perverse to the facts on\nrecord and bad in law.\n6. Considering the factual Matrix and judicial precedents, the penalty levied

ASHOK PANWAR HUF,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assesses ITA No

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

3 In his reply the assessee had also claimed that since purchase and sale transactions were through banking channels and therefore verifiable, the capital gain earned on the sale should be considered as genuine. The assessee has mainly contended that since purchase was made through banking channels, it was a genuine transaction. Secondly, sale was made online after paying

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

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

3-6 of the assessment order. 4. The ld. AO has stated that during the F.Y. 2010-11 assessee has made sale of forest produce “Phuwar” of Rs.8,51,806/-, which come in the meaning of forest produce as per the forest department and Agriculture department notification referred. The ld. AO has stated that since Phuwar fals under the category

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

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

3-6 of the assessment order. 4. The ld. AO has stated that during the F.Y. 2010-11 assessee has made sale of forest produce “Phuwar” of Rs.8,51,806/-, which come in the meaning of forest produce as per the forest department and Agriculture department notification referred. The ld. AO has stated that since Phuwar fals under the category

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS , UDAIPU

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

3-6 of the assessment order. 4. The ld. AO has stated that during the F.Y. 2010-11 assessee has made sale of forest produce “Phuwar” of Rs.8,51,806/-, which come in the meaning of forest produce as per the forest department and Agriculture department notification referred. The ld. AO has stated that since Phuwar fals under the category

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

purchases is to\nbe added not substantial part of transaction—When in subsequent assessment year in AY 2011-\n12, AO himself made addition only @ 10% of net profit in assessment order passed under section\n143(3); book profit shown by assessee @ 11.45% for year under consideration was reasonable\nand justified-Therefore, assessee also succeeded on merit-Assssee's appeal allowed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is 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

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is 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

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is 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

3 raised by the revenue in ITA No. 167 to 169/Jodh/2022 is common for alleged addition on account of suppression of receipt of X-ray for an amount of Rs. 33,02,385/-. The fact related to this ground as emerges from the assessment order for A. Y. 2016-17 in ITA No. 167/Jodh/2022 is that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR vs. VINESH KUMAR BALAR, PALI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

bogus Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) claimed exempt under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual from Pali, Rajasthan. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the Balar group of cases on 17.12.2015. Consequent