CIT, Jaipur v. Shruti Gems
[Citation -2017-LL-0523-45]

Citation 2017-LL-0523-45
Appellant Name CIT, Jaipur
Respondent Name Shruti Gems
Court HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 23/05/2017
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags rejection of books of accounts • cross-examination • bogus purchase • admissibility of deduction
Bot Summary: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,89,29,835/- and accepting the gross profit declared by the assessee, ignoring the fact that it itself has upheld the finding with regard to bogus purchase shown by the assessee and rejection of books of accounts 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in one hand upholding the finding of bogus purchases made by the assesee and consequent rejection of books of accounts and also observing that the possiblity of leakage of revenue cannot be ruled out and on the other hand accepting the gross profit declared by the assessee and deleting the addition of Rs.1,89,29,835/- made by the assessing officer 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in not only deleting the addition of Rs.53,37,410/- sustained by the CIT(A) but deleting the entire addition of Rs.1,89,29,835/- made by the assessing officer and allowing deduction u/s 10B on the entire profit ITA-658/2009 3 Heard learned counsel for the parties. We remit back the case to the Assessing Officer for deciding afresh on the factual matrix. The authority will accept the law but the transaction whether it is genuine or not will be verified by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the aforesaid three judgments. The matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer. It will be open for the assessee to raise all contentions including opportunity of cross-examination before the Assessing Officer.


HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 658/2009 C I T Jaipur Appellant Versus M/S Shruti Gems Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR Judgment 23/05/2017 1. By way of this appeal, appellant has challenged judgment of Tribunal whereby Tribunal has dismissed appeal of Department. 2. While admitting appeal, this Court framed following substantial question of law: 1. Whether on facts and circumstances of case, tribunal was justified in deleting addition of Rs.1,89,29,835/- and accepting gross profit declared by assessee, ignoring fact that it itself has upheld finding with regard to bogus purchase shown by assessee and rejection of books of accounts? 2. Whether on facts and circumstances of case, tribunal was justified in one hand upholding finding of bogus purchases made by assesee and consequent rejection of books of accounts and also observing that possiblity of leakage of revenue cannot be ruled out and on other hand accepting gross profit declared by assessee and deleting addition of Rs.1,89,29,835/- made by assessing officer? 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of case, tribunal was justified in not only deleting addition of Rs.53,37,410/- sustained by CIT(A) but deleting entire addition of Rs.1,89,29,835/- made by assessing officer and allowing deduction u/s 10B on entire profit? (2 of 2) [ITA-658/2009] 3 Heard learned counsel for parties. 3.1 It is not in dispute that controversy involved in this case is squarely covered by decision of this Court in CIT, Jaipur-II, Jaipur Vs. M/s Aditya Gems, D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 234/2008, decided on 2.11.2016, wherein it has been held as under: Considering law declared by Supreme Court in case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.8956/2015 decided on 06.04.2015 whereby Supreme Court has dismissed SLP and confirmed order dated 09.12.2014 passed by Gujarat High Court and other decisions of High Court of Gujarat in case of Sanjay Oilcake Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 316 ITR 274 (Guj) and N.K. Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Tax Appeal No.240/2003 decided on 20.06.2016, parties are bound by principle of law pronounced in aforesaid three judgments. 4. We remit back case to Assessing Officer for deciding afresh on factual matrix. authority will accept law but transaction whether it is genuine or not will be verified by Assessing Officer on basis of aforesaid three judgments. 4. issue is answered accordingly. matter is remitted back to Assessing Officer. It will be open for assessee to raise all contentions including opportunity of cross-examination before Assessing Officer. 5. appeal is disposed of. (VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR),J. (K.S. JHAVERI),J. gandhi 89 CIT, Jaipur v. Shruti Gem
Report Error