THE ITO, WARD-3(2),, JAMNAGAR vs. SHRI RAJESH GULABRAI SHAYANI,, JAM-KHAMBHALIA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

penalty. The\ assessee was provided a copy of this order by this office along with show cause notice dated 20/12/2010 asking him to explain the above purchases by producing cogent documentary evidences. However, the assessee did not give any explanation in this regard. Under the circumstances, it is clear that the assessee has nothing to say in this matter

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD., RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT vs. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD., RJAKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

bogus purchase of Rs. 1,93,37,000/-. (ii) The estimation of suppressed sales done by the CIT(Appeals) by extrapolating certain percentage on accounted sales is unwarranted and also adoption of gross profit rate on suppressed sales is bad in law as if at all the profit was to be estimated, only net profit could have been estimated

KRUPALU METALS P. LTD.,JAMNAGAR vs. THE NFAC CIT(A), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita Nos.111 To 113/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16

penalty to the tune of Rs. 3.20 Crore has been imposed on the appellant company under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, apart from raising a demand of Central Excise Duty of an equivalent amount, vide order dated 15.12.2016 passed by the Central Excise Authority. Further, the corresponding purchase of raw material, as also the sale of finished

KRUPALU METALS P. LTD.,JAMNAGAR vs. THE NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita Nos.111 To 113/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16

penalty to the tune of Rs. 3.20 Crore has been imposed on the appellant company under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, apart from raising a demand of Central Excise Duty of an equivalent amount, vide order dated 15.12.2016 passed by the Central Excise Authority. Further, the corresponding purchase of raw material, as also the sale of finished

KRUPALU METALS P. LTD.,JAMNAGAR vs. THE NFAC DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.111 To 113/Rjt/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16 Krupalu Metals Pvt. Ltd Income Tax Officer, बनाम / National Faceless Assessment Plot No..4345, Gidc, Phase- Vs. Centre, Delhi/Dcit, Circle-3, Iii, Udhyog Nagar, Jamnagar Jamnagar-361008 स्थायी लेखा सं/. जीआइआर सं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aadck6122 B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sarvesh Gohil, Ld. Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 27/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order Captioned Three Appeals, Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To

penalty to the tune of Rs. 3.20 Crore has been imposed on the appellant company under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, apart from raising a demand of Central Excise Duty of an equivalent amount, vide order dated 15.12.2016 passed by the Central Excise Authority. Further, the corresponding purchase of raw material, as also the sale of finished