SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

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

43,229/- 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

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.

purchase or sales bills. Further also the law is settled that Id AO should have followed the principle of rule of consistency as held by Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v/s Malborough Polychem P. Ltd. reported in 309 ITR Page 43 (Raj) as under: - 16 Asst. Year: 2017-18 "The Tribunal held that such deduction

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

purchase under new scheme/project with amended\nterms & conditions.\nB.4 In fact, unfortunately on account of adverse financial stringencies Shri Bharat\nManwani could not arrange the booking amount of first installment from the related\nbuyers. Not only this the financial position of Shri Bharat Manwani becomes critical in\nhis personal business activities and due to this reason in the market rumors

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 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

purchased flats from the company but\nthe transactions mentioned in this ledger accounts were not executed with the company.\nThis is again avoiding tactics even when the assessee company has been caught with the\nevidences of cash transaction. There is cash transaction as recorded on these documents\nwith the flat purchasers, which is proved from these documents. The assessee company

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

43 91,90,400.00 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

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

bogus - Held, yes - Whether since Assessing Officer had drawn an adverse conclusion only on account of non-verifiability of sundry creditors but there being no dispute as regards purchases and trading results having been accepted, addition made under section 68 was not sustainable - Held, yes [Paras 15.2 & 15.3] [In favour of assessee]" In the case of Continental Carbon India

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

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

43,636/- I.T.A. No.755/Jodh/2025 & SA No. 03/Jodh/2025 (In ITA No. 755/Jodh/2025) Assessment Year 2017-18 22 Besides the above, Smt. Tulchi Devi is also owner of fertile agriculture land of 29 bigha in Village Sargoth. Copy of purchase deed as well as khasragirdawari is available on paper book page no. 167 to 184. It is further submitted that during

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

43. On verification on phone by search team, some persons told that there was no discount allowed by the hospital though this was the amount which has been paid by Bhamashah Yojana, whereas some persons told that due to incomplete or wrong/improper treatment, discount was allowed. In FY 2016-17, the appellant has claimed expenses under the head Discount amounting