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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act conducted in Jeevan Jyoti Group of cases on 29/05/2012. Assessment orders, each dated 31/07/2017 were passed on 31/07/2017 under section 153A of the Act for which approval under section 153D of the Act was given by JCIT vide aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 of JCIT. The assessee’s appeals were disposed

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act conducted in Jeevan Jyoti Group of cases on 29/05/2012. Assessment orders, each dated 31/07/2017 were passed on 31/07/2017 under section 153A of the Act for which approval under section 153D of the Act was given by JCIT vide aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 of JCIT. The assessee’s appeals were disposed

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act conducted in Jeevan Jyoti Group of cases on 29/05/2012. Assessment orders, each dated 31/07/2017 were passed on 31/07/2017 under section 153A of the Act for which approval under section 153D of the Act was given by JCIT vide aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 of JCIT. The assessee’s appeals were disposed

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act conducted in Jeevan Jyoti Group of cases on 29/05/2012. Assessment orders, each dated 31/07/2017 were passed on 31/07/2017 under section 153A of the Act for which approval under section 153D of the Act was given by JCIT vide aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 of JCIT. The assessee’s appeals were disposed

M/S. SUBHASH STONE INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,NAINITAL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

seizure operations u/s 132(1) against the assessee, on 03.02.2011 , and hence assessment originally framed by the AO u/s 143(3) , on 21st December, 2010 for assessment year 2008-09, was made prior to the date of search on 03.02.2011 u/s 132(1) of the 1961 Act, and hence is an unabated assessment. Reference is drawn to the provisions

M/S BALAJI AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES(P).LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT. (0SD), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

search and seizure operations were validly conducted by the Revenue under section 132(1) of the 1961 Act against the assessee on 27.08.2009 , we are proceeding to adjudicate ground of appeal nos. 5 and 6 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with tribunal. Vide ground of appeal no. 5, the assessee is 23 ITA NO. 152/A/2013, 179/A/2013, 632/A/2014

JCIT(OSD),, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S BALAJI AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES, (P) LTD., ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

search and seizure operations were validly conducted by the Revenue under section 132(1) of the 1961 Act against the assessee on 27.08.2009 , we are proceeding to adjudicate ground of appeal nos. 5 and 6 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with tribunal. Vide ground of appeal no. 5, the assessee is 23 ITA NO. 152/A/2013, 179/A/2013, 632/A/2014

M/S BALAJU AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

search and seizure operations were validly conducted by the Revenue under section 132(1) of the 1961 Act against the assessee on 27.08.2009 , we are proceeding to adjudicate ground of appeal nos. 5 and 6 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with tribunal. Vide ground of appeal no. 5, the assessee is 23 ITA NO. 152/A/2013, 179/A/2013, 632/A/2014

M/S BALAJI AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT,CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

search and seizure operations were validly conducted by the Revenue under section 132(1) of the 1961 Act against the assessee on 27.08.2009 , we are proceeding to adjudicate ground of appeal nos. 5 and 6 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with tribunal. Vide ground of appeal no. 5, the assessee is 23 ITA NO. 152/A/2013, 179/A/2013, 632/A/2014

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

seizure action, the ld. CIT(A) held that Board’s Circular No. 7/2003, did not make any such prohibition that the assessment or reassessment would be confined to the evidence found in the course of the search. Relying upon the case of Shiv Nath Rai Harnarayan (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT 117 TTJ 480 (ITAT Delhi Bench

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

seizure action, the ld. CIT(A) held that Board’s Circular No. 7/2003, did not make any such prohibition that the assessment or reassessment would be confined to the evidence found in the course of the search. Relying upon the case of Shiv Nath Rai Harnarayan (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT 117 TTJ 480 (ITAT Delhi Bench

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

seizure action, the ld. CIT(A) held that Board’s Circular No. 7/2003, did not make any such prohibition that the assessment or reassessment would be confined to the evidence found in the course of the search. Relying upon the case of Shiv Nath Rai Harnarayan (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT 117 TTJ 480 (ITAT Delhi Bench

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

68 of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case as the appellant discharged the burden as required and action of the assessing officer and his observations in the course as confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are not correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. C.IT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

68 of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case as the appellant discharged the burden as required and action of the assessing officer and his observations in the course as confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are not correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING(P).LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. CIT(OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

68 of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case as the appellant discharged the burden as required and action of the assessing officer and his observations in the course as confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are not correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That

M/S KESARWANI <ARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

68 of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case as the appellant discharged the burden as required and action of the assessing officer and his observations in the course as confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are not correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That

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

section 145(3) of the act and once the said provision for rejection of account was not invoked then the addition made is unwarranted because for rejection of account invoking of provision of section 145(3) is a mandatory requirement. In this regard there are various decisions in support of the assessee including the decision of apex court and various

ACIT,, ALLAHABAD vs. KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,, 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

section 145(3) of the act and once the said provision for rejection of account was not invoked then the addition made is unwarranted because for rejection of account invoking of provision of section 145(3) is a mandatory requirement. In this regard there are various decisions in support of the assessee including the decision of apex court and various

SURESH CHANDRA PURWAR (HUF),ALLAHABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12

68, Zero Road, Allahabad, U.P. of Income Tax, Central Circle-1 Allahabad , U.P. PAN:AALHS3075E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Ashish Bansal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Shantanu Dhamija , CIT, DR Date of hearing: 27. 07. 2021 Date of pronouncement: 31.08. 2021 O R D E R PER SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee has arisen