KESARWANI & CO.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii). Observing that the assessee had unsecured loans amounting to Rs.2,38,32,073/- and interest

KESARWANI & C0,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii). Observing that the assessee had unsecured loans amounting to Rs.2,38,32,073/- and interest

KESARWANI & C0.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT., ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii). Observing that the assessee had unsecured loans amounting to Rs.2,38,32,073/- and interest

SAVLA AGENCIES,ALLAHABAD vs. JCIT, RANGE-I, , ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2011-12 Savla Agencies, V. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, 26, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Range-I, Allahabad Allahabad-211001 Pan-Aawfs0816J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Tanmay Sadh, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.01.2023 O R D E R

36(1)(iii) or section 37 of the Income Tax Act. Since the CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to remand the matter therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) qua this issue is not inconformity with provisions of section 250 and 251 of the Income Tax Act. Further, the AO has made the disallowance

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

36 different assessment years in the cases of the aforesaid 11 different assessees. It was the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee that considering the enormity of seized materials, digital data, submissions of the assessees, appraisal report provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, reports under Rules 9 and 9A of ITSC(P) Rules, and other

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

36 different assessment years in the cases of the aforesaid 11 different assessees. It was the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee that considering the enormity of seized materials, digital data, submissions of the assessees, appraisal report provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, reports under Rules 9 and 9A of ITSC(P) Rules, and other

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

36 different assessment years in the cases of the aforesaid 11 different assessees. It was the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee that considering the enormity of seized materials, digital data, submissions of the assessees, appraisal report provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, reports under Rules 9 and 9A of ITSC(P) Rules, and other

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

36 different assessment years in the cases of the aforesaid 11 different assessees. It was the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee that considering the enormity of seized materials, digital data, submissions of the assessees, appraisal report provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, reports under Rules 9 and 9A of ITSC(P) Rules, and other

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on adhoc basis by the authorities below, the addition of Rs.1,36

SANJAY KUMAR KESARWANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO -1(5), ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17

36 pages, which comprises written submissions as well replies on merit filed before AO and the case laws , to substantiate its contentions on merits and on law . The learned counsel for the assessee prayed that the matter may be set aside to the file of ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, as the submissions/evidences need to be evaluated/verified and adjudicated