INCOME TAX OFFICER, SURAT vs. BORDA BROTHERS, VARACHHA ROAD, SURAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

purchases from bogus parties was liable to be added in the hands of the Assessee. reversing the order passed by (he Hon'ble ITAT that restricted addition to 25% holding that such restriction goes against the principles of Sections 68 and 69C

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), SURAT, SURAT vs. BORDA BROTHERS, SURAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

purchases from bogus parties was liable to be added in the hands of the Assessee. reversing the order passed by (he Hon'ble ITAT that restricted addition to 25% holding that such restriction goes against the principles of Sections 68 and 69C

LATE SHRI BHIMSEN DARBARILAL ARORA,,SURAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, SURAT

In the result, ground no.4 raised by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1706/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora Through, Vs. The Acit, Circle-5, L/H. Rajat Bhimsen Arora, Surat. Smt. Mamta Bhimsen Arora, A-201, Madhulika Apartment, Bhatar Road, Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acaps9230L

69C. In fact AO has nowhere referred about this section and in fact made disallowance out of purchases treating them unverifiable. Finding of excess stock & cash by itself is good ground for rejection of books of a/c especially when such excess stock & cash has not been incorporated in the books. Hence, the action

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.1(1)(1),, SURAT vs. ENVIRO CONTROL PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, all the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) A.C.I.T., Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Enviro House, Opp. Bank Of Vs. Surat. Maharashtra, Ghod Dod Road, Surat-395007. Pan No. Aaace 8700 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

bogus purchases and made addition under Section 69C of the Act on account of unexplained expenditure. 5. Aggrieved by the additions

KHAZANA BAZAR PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1)(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.333/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Ward-1(1)(3), Vs. M/S. Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Surat. C-104, Radha Raman Textile Market, Saroli, Surat- 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafck0726P (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.334/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S. Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(1)(3), C-104, Radha Raman Textile Surat. Market, Saroli, Surat- 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafck0726P (Assessee) (Respondent)

Bogus purchases) - Assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 - Pursuant to survey action under section 133A, it was found that assessee had made purchases from various parties out of which some were notified hawala operators on official website of Sales Tax Department of State Government - Thus, Assessing Officer made additions to income of assessee under section 69C

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), SURAT vs. M/S. KHAZANA BAZAR PRIVATE LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.333/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Ward-1(1)(3), Vs. M/S. Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Surat. C-104, Radha Raman Textile Market, Saroli, Surat- 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafck0726P (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.334/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S. Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(1)(3), C-104, Radha Raman Textile Surat. Market, Saroli, Surat- 395010. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafck0726P (Assessee) (Respondent)

Bogus purchases) - Assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 - Pursuant to survey action under section 133A, it was found that assessee had made purchases from various parties out of which some were notified hawala operators on official website of Sales Tax Department of State Government - Thus, Assessing Officer made additions to income of assessee under section 69C

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(1), SURAT, SURAT vs. SUNIL MITTAL HUF , SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.520/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Sunil Mittal Huf, Ward – 1(3)(1), 101, Mahadev Park, Kailash Nagar, Surat Ghod Dod Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aamhs7185Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 15/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2023

69C invoking section 115BBE of the Act. The assessee was doing business form residence address for several years which was not doubted by the assessing officer, the said address is still reflecting the I.T. records, hence it is assessee`s business income and therefore section 115BBE cannot be applied to the assessee under consideration. Most of the sales made

JAYVADAN RUGHNATHWALA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Assessment Year 2018-19

bogus purchases cannot be made u/s 69C as the payments for the purchases have been recorded in the books of accounts. It is to be noted that the assessing officer has not invoked section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT, ADAJAN vs. DIAM INTERNATIONAL, MAHIDHARPURA

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed whereas Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.610 & 626/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Kansara Sheri, Mahindrapura, Majura Gate,Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 बनाम/ Vs. M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Kansara Sheri, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Mahindrapura, Surat-395 Hazira Road, Surat-395 009 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaofm 4432 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.611 & 614/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2009-10) M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Kansara Sheri, Mahindrapura, Majura Gate,Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 Diam International बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Vs. Surat, Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Kansara Sheri, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Mahindrapura, Surat-395 Hazira Road, Surat-395 009 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaofm 4432 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 24.07.2023 and 13.07.2023 by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2008-09 and 2009-10, which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s

M/S DIAM INTERNATIONAL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed whereas Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.610 & 626/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Kansara Sheri, Mahindrapura, Majura Gate,Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 बनाम/ Vs. M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Kansara Sheri, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Mahindrapura, Surat-395 Hazira Road, Surat-395 009 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaofm 4432 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.611 & 614/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2009-10) M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Kansara Sheri, Mahindrapura, Majura Gate,Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 Diam International बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Vs. Surat, Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Kansara Sheri, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Mahindrapura, Surat-395 Hazira Road, Surat-395 009 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaofm 4432 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 24.07.2023 and 13.07.2023 by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2008-09 and 2009-10, which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT, ADAJAN vs. DIAM INTERNATIONAL, MAHIDHARPURA

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed whereas Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.610 & 626/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Kansara Sheri, Mahindrapura, Majura Gate,Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 बनाम/ Vs. M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Kansara Sheri, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Mahindrapura, Surat-395 Hazira Road, Surat-395 009 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaofm 4432 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.611 & 614/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2009-10) M/S Diam International Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Kansara Sheri, Mahindrapura, Majura Gate,Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 Diam International बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), 202-B, Krishna Apartment, Vs. Surat, Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Kansara Sheri, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Mahindrapura, Surat-395 Hazira Road, Surat-395 009 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaofm 4432 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 24.07.2023 and 13.07.2023 by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2008-09 and 2009-10, which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), SURAT, SURAT vs. HITESHBHAI POPATBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.107 To 109/Srt/2025 Assessment Years:(2010-11 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Ward – 1(2)(6), 17, Hetal Nagar Society, Rander Road, Surat Near Navyug College, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akvps5306G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Srt/2025 Assessment Year:(2007-08) The Ito, Vs. Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Ward – 1(3)(1), 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Surat Athwalines, Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.1/Srt/2025 [Arising In Ita No.115/Srt/2025] Assessment Year:(2007-08) Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Vs. The Ito, 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Ward – 1(3)(1), Athwalines, Surat - 395001 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mitul R. Mehta, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

69C of the Act. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO has disallowed 25% of total non- genuine purchases of Rs.4,67,985/- from the concerns of Rajendra Jain Group, who were found to have provided accommodation entries by way of bogus purchase, sale and unsecured

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), SURAT, SURAT vs. HITESHBHAI POPATBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.107 To 109/Srt/2025 Assessment Years:(2010-11 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Ward – 1(2)(6), 17, Hetal Nagar Society, Rander Road, Surat Near Navyug College, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akvps5306G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Srt/2025 Assessment Year:(2007-08) The Ito, Vs. Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Ward – 1(3)(1), 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Surat Athwalines, Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.1/Srt/2025 [Arising In Ita No.115/Srt/2025] Assessment Year:(2007-08) Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Vs. The Ito, 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Ward – 1(3)(1), Athwalines, Surat - 395001 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mitul R. Mehta, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

69C of the Act. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO has disallowed 25% of total non- genuine purchases of Rs.4,67,985/- from the concerns of Rajendra Jain Group, who were found to have provided accommodation entries by way of bogus purchase, sale and unsecured

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), SURAT, SURAT vs. HITESHBHAI POPATBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.107 To 109/Srt/2025 Assessment Years:(2010-11 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Ward – 1(2)(6), 17, Hetal Nagar Society, Rander Road, Surat Near Navyug College, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akvps5306G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Srt/2025 Assessment Year:(2007-08) The Ito, Vs. Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Ward – 1(3)(1), 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Surat Athwalines, Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.1/Srt/2025 [Arising In Ita No.115/Srt/2025] Assessment Year:(2007-08) Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Vs. The Ito, 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Ward – 1(3)(1), Athwalines, Surat - 395001 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mitul R. Mehta, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

69C of the Act. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO has disallowed 25% of total non- genuine purchases of Rs.4,67,985/- from the concerns of Rajendra Jain Group, who were found to have provided accommodation entries by way of bogus purchase, sale and unsecured

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), SURAT, ANAVIL BUSINESS CENTRE, SURAT vs. NAVINBHAI HIMATLAL SHAH, DIWALI BAUG ATHWALINES

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.107 To 109/Srt/2025 Assessment Years:(2010-11 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Ward – 1(2)(6), 17, Hetal Nagar Society, Rander Road, Surat Near Navyug College, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akvps5306G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Srt/2025 Assessment Year:(2007-08) The Ito, Vs. Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Ward – 1(3)(1), 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Surat Athwalines, Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.1/Srt/2025 [Arising In Ita No.115/Srt/2025] Assessment Year:(2007-08) Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Vs. The Ito, 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Ward – 1(3)(1), Athwalines, Surat - 395001 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mitul R. Mehta, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

69C of the Act. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO has disallowed 25% of total non- genuine purchases of Rs.4,67,985/- from the concerns of Rajendra Jain Group, who were found to have provided accommodation entries by way of bogus purchase, sale and unsecured

BALMUKUND M VAISHNAV,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(7), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Balmukund M. Vaishnav, Surat. 5B/1054, Ramnanth Mahadev Ni Sheri, Haripura, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aokpv5065Q (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.205/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2013-14) Balmukund M. Vaishnav, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), 5B/1054, Ramnanth Mahadev Ni Surat. Sheri, Haripura, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aokpv5065Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) r.w.s. 145(2) of the Income Tax Act, and since the ITA Nos. 204 &205/SRT/2019 Balmukund M. Vaishnav assessee failed to explain that the purchases worth Rs.28,81,47,552/- are genuine purchases therefore appropriate addition on account of bogus purchase of Rs.28,81,47,552/- u/s 69C

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), SURAT, SURAT vs. HITESHBHAI POPATBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

69C of the Act. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO has disallowed 25% of total non- genuine purchases of Rs.4,84,128/- from the concerns of Rajendra Jain Group, who were found to have provided accommodation entries by way of bogus purchase, sale and unsecured

RAJESH PODDAR,SURAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

Section\n292C of the assessee.\n(8) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-\n4, Surat ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer.\n(9) It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) may be set aside and\nthat the AO may be restored