MESERS SUPERTECH FORGINGS(INDIA) PVT.LTD.,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE IV, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Loss Account as expenditure—AO stated that on verification of details available on record, it had been noticed that Assessee made bogus purchases; however, no specific averments were made as regards which details available on record reflected such bogus purchases—The Hon’ble Court held that ...“AO for purpose of reopening assessment placed reliance upon material from external source that

NEERAJ KUMAR SETHI,DELHI vs. ITO, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

carried out in the case of Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, who in his statement admitted that through his numerous entities, he has given both purchase and sale related non-genuine/accommodation entries to various persons including to the Appellant of Rs. 1,98,47,645/-, Notice u/s.133(6) of the Act, was issued

NASA AGRO INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,FAZILKA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

forwarded to the AO , who applied his mind to the said information and carried out further investigation ( as apparent from para – 3 of the assessment order ) and after recording reasons ( para – 4 of order ) necessary approval obtained from higher authorities and proceedings initiated vide notice u/s 148 of the Act . 14. As such in the instant case

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

loss of Rs. 30,618/- and carried transaction of Rs. 61,97,37,626/-, which also proves beyond any doubt that assessee had not traded only in one script as alleged by the Ld. Assessing Officer. During the period under consideration assessee invested /traded in multiple scripts, which was entirely ignored by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Sir, assesee invested

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

loss of Rs. 30,618/- and carried transaction of Rs. 61,97,37,626/-, which also proves beyond any doubt that assessee had not traded only in one script as alleged by the Ld. Assessing Officer. During the period under consideration assessee invested /traded in multiple scripts, which was entirely ignored by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Sir, assesee invested

JYOTI SAROOP GROVER PROP. MS SANT METAL INDUSTRIES SEKHU ROAD, WARD 7 MALOUT,PUNJAB vs. THE AO NFAC DELHI JURISDICTIONAL AO THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AMRITSAR, PUNJAB

Appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Dcit - Central Circle (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) Amritsar बनाम/ Vs. Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Punjab-143001 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 434/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit - Central Circle Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Amritsar (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) बनाम/ Vs. Punjab-143001 Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) –Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana

Loss account for the year under consideration. b) Copy of complete purchase report of the Assessee for the year under consideration. c) Copy of the purchase account for the year under consideration along with Supplier wise purchase summary for the year AY 2021-22. d) Copy of the Sale account for the year under consideration along with recipient wise sale

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR vs. SMT. JYOTI SAROOP GROVER, MALOUT

Appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Dcit - Central Circle (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) Amritsar बनाम/ Vs. Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Punjab-143001 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 434/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit - Central Circle Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Amritsar (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) बनाम/ Vs. Punjab-143001 Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) –Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana

Loss account for the year under consideration. b) Copy of complete purchase report of the Assessee for the year under consideration. c) Copy of the purchase account for the year under consideration along with Supplier wise purchase summary for the year AY 2021-22. d) Copy of the Sale account for the year under consideration along with recipient wise sale

YADAV RICE MILLS,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, BATHINDA, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

loss A/c placed in PB ) , that the total disputed sale figure of Rs.45.10 lakhs , has already formed a part of the gross turnover credited in the trading A/c , which has been considered for working out net profits as per P & L A/c and for all practical purpose the said disputed sale figure has already been subjected to taxation and adding

SMT. DEEPTI AGGARWAL,GURDAS PUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

carried out. B) PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE MADE IN CASH: The purchase payments were made in cash and not through the normal banking channel therefore the same were non-verifiable from the authentic supporting details such as bank accounts/documents. On one side, assessee is claiming that money is received through banking channel and so transaction is genuine, but what the assessee

SH.GAURAV AGGARWAL,GURDAS PUR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

carried out. B) PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE MADE IN CASH: The purchase payments were made in cash and not through the normal banking channel therefore the same were non-verifiable from the authentic supporting details such as bank accounts/documents. On one side, assessee is claiming that money is received through banking channel and so transaction is genuine, but what the assessee

M/S RAMAN KUMAR AGGARWAL,GURDASPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER .OF. INCOME. TAX , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

carried out. B) PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE MADE IN CASH: The purchase payments were made in cash and not through the normal banking channel therefore the same were non-verifiable from the authentic supporting details such as bank accounts/documents. On one side, assessee is claiming that money is received through banking channel and so transaction is genuine, but what the assessee

SH. RAMAN KUMAR AGGARWAL,GURDAS PUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

carried out. B) PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE MADE IN CASH: The purchase payments were made in cash and not through the normal banking channel therefore the same were non-verifiable from the authentic supporting details such as bank accounts/documents. On one side, assessee is claiming that money is received through banking channel and so transaction is genuine, but what the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH. M/S NOVELTY SWEETS, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

carried out on 05.02.2019 and statement of Sh. Jatinder Singh (Karta Bhupinder Singh HUF) was recorded on 06.02.2019. The AO has mentioned that as per Profit & Loss account as on 03.02.2021, assessee showed sales of Rs.2,60,29,553/- and same was confronted recording of statement at the time of survey proceedings. As per the AO during survey proceedings, some

SH. VIKRAM JAIN,AMRITSAR. vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes on the terms afore-stated

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 336/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11

carries some identification of the goods which, on any claim or dispute arising in relation to the transaction subsequently, could be pressed into service. The assessee’s products have various specifications, only upon satisfaction of which, including as to quality, would the trade transaction, which are for lakhs of rupees, materialize. Payment in cash is in fact discouraged

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), JAMMU vs. SH. NEERAJ AGGARWAL , JAMMU

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 349/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11

loss to the best of his judgment and determine the sum payable by the assessee on the basis of such assessment: The finding by the ld. CIT(A) holding the invocation of s. 144 by the AO as invalid, cannot, therefore, be countenanced. 4.5 The next question before us is if therefore the instant assessment could be said

KUNDAN JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHI CHOWK, SADAR BAZAR, MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MUKTSAR, MUKTSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

carried out undisclosed transaction, with one party namely Ridhi International, operated by Sh. Shripal Vohra from whom, the assessee has been alleged to have received an undisclosed amount of Rs. 70.09 lakhs in its bank accounts, held with “Saraswat Cooperative Bank” and with “Canara Bank” totaling the said amount. 8. Before the Ld. the ld. first appellate authority, the assessee

MESERS GANESH RICE MILLS,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the assessee ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 14.12.2016. During the course of survey, no account books, sale/ purchase vouchers or expenditure vouchers for any year were found maintained at the business premises of the assessee. No explanation about the non-maintenance of books of account at the business premises of the assessee was furnished by the assessee

SMT. KIRAN MAHAJAN,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2) JAMMU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 319 & S.A. 15/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13

carrying cost, viz., toward storage, interest, insurance, etc. (in respect of the goods), entails business risk in terms of adverse price movement; loss of quality over time/due to improper storage conditions, etc. Any man of business or commerce and, in fact, any prudent person would take steps to mitigate or reduce his risk, rather than, as we observe in this

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALANDHAR vs. SMT. BANEET KAUR BHASIN,, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessment ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014 & Ita No. 251/Asr/2018 Assessment Year:2009-10

loss account to make various additions although it has been proposed by him to reject the books of account. 6.6 The assessee has tried to demonstrate that as to how the bogus creditors appeared in her books of account. The assessee has bifurcated the bogus sundry creditors into three parts and submitted as under:- (i). OP. BALANCES AS ON 01/04/2008