M/S KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowance by Rs.73,16,513/- on account of bogus purchases even though the facts brought on records by the AO have been admitted by the CIT(A). 6. That the order of the Ld. CIT (A) being erroneous in law and on facts needs to be vacated and the order of the A.O. be restored.” 2. The facts

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, ,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowances and the approving authority will also ensure that proper enquiry or investigations are carried out by the Assessing Officer on the relevant materials including material in the hands of the Department. Secondly, the Assessing Officer also keeps in mind the interest of Revenue. Therefore, the said provision provides application of mind by the approving authority of the Department. I.T.A

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowances and the approving authority will also ensure that proper enquiry or investigations are carried out by the Assessing Officer on the relevant materials including material in the hands of the Department. Secondly, the Assessing Officer also keeps in mind the interest of Revenue. Therefore, the said provision provides application of mind by the approving authority of the Department. I.T.A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD vs. JYOTI MEDISERVICES LTD., ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowances and the approving authority will also ensure that proper enquiry or investigations are carried out by the Assessing Officer on the relevant materials including material in the hands of the Department. Secondly, the Assessing Officer also keeps in mind the interest of Revenue. Therefore, the said provision provides application of mind by the approving authority of the Department. I.T.A

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowances and the approving authority will also ensure that proper enquiry or investigations are carried out by the Assessing Officer on the relevant materials including material in the hands of the Department. Secondly, the Assessing Officer also keeps in mind the interest of Revenue. Therefore, the said provision provides application of mind by the approving authority of the Department. I.T.A

ATAUL MUSTAFA,NANBAI SHAHZADPUR KAUSHAMBI vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2 ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2013-14 Ataul Mustafa, Vs. Dcit, Nanbai, Shahzadpur, Kaushambi Circle-2, Allahabad Pan:Bvcpm0589G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.12.2024 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Allahabad Dated 7.03.2019 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Has Ignored The Submissions Made Before Him, Ignored The Comparative Cases & Confirmed The Addition Of Rs. 25,96,375/- Which Was Made In An Ex Parte Order By Applying A Higher Rate (2%) Of Net Profit. 2- Because The Commissioner Of Appeals Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By Using The 2% Net Profit Rate Made Upon By The Ld Assessing Officer Relying Upon The Case Of Babu Islaam, The Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals Disregarded The Established Determination Of 0.41% Net Profit Made By The Hon' Able Settlement Commission In The Very Case Of Babu Islam. The Appellant Argues That The Rs 25,96,375/- Of Addition Should Be Deleted. 3- Because The Order Is Bad In The Eyes Of Law & Against The Facts.”

disallowances, if they were not supported by vouchers or other evidences to the satisfaction of the assessee. For this proposition, he relied upon the case of Goodyear India Limited vs. CIT (2000) 246 ITR 116 (Del). Therefore, he applied the provisions of section 145(3) and rejected the books of the assessee. In estimating the income, he relied upon