DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections\nare dismissed

section 144, the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner\n(Appeals) were in error in resorting to an estimation of income and such\nexercise undertaken by them was not sustainable.”\nb) ITO vs. Amit Verma in ITA No. 4558/Del /2011 vide order dated 19.12.2012\n(Del Bench)\nc) ACIT vs. Ercon Composites as reported in 49 taxmann.com 489 (Jodhpur\nBench

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, , LUDHIANA vs. M/S AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES, KHANNA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES,KHANNA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES, KHANNA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , LUDHIANA vs. AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES, KHANNA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES,KHANNA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, , LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES,KHANNA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, , LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

AMAN FEED INDUSTRIES,KHANNA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, , LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1252, 1253,1254,1255/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19,2019-20 M/S Aman Feed Industries, The Dcit, E-2, Focal Point, Vs Central Circle-1, Khanna. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 116,181,457/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y.: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 The Dcit, Vs M/S Aman Feed Industries, Central Circle-1, E-2, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacfa3624L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Kulbhushan Goyal & Ms, Deepali Aggarwal, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax, 1961. 4. That he was further not justified to arbitrarily uphold the addition of Rs. 37,20,823/- by applying an arbitrary G. P. rate on the alleged bogus purchases of Rs. 4,51,00,883/- (instead of actual figure of Rs. 4,29,46,144

BANSAL RICE TRADERS,SANGRUR vs. ITO-WARD, SANGRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

144 of the Act. 6. Now the assessee is in appeal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention towards page no. 4 of the assessee’s paper book which is the copy of the reason recorded by the A.O. for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act and read as under: Reasons for issue notice

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. RITU DHINGRA, SHAKTI VIHAR, HAIBOWAL KALAN, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and cross appeal of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: him:- (a) That the assessment order dated 31.03.2023 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153C is bad in law in as much no incriminating material was found suggesting any escapement of income at premises of Sh. Avtar Singh Kochhar. (b) That the assessment order passed is non-est and bad in law in as much the proceedings have not been conducted in the manner prescribed by the Department instructions from time to time which are mandatory for compliance by the Learned Authorities particularly with respect

bogus foreign remittances. Relying upon the statement of Shri Avtar Singh Kochar recorded under section 131(1A) and the seized digital evidence, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was a beneficiary of ingenuine foreign remittances routed through M/s Dhanya General Trading FZE and M/s Tirupati Diam FZE. According to the Assessing Officer, the transaction details appearing in the seized

RITU DHINGRA, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and cross appeal of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: him:-

bogus foreign remittances. Relying upon the statement of Shri Avtar Singh Kochar recorded under section 131(1A) and the seized digital evidence, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was a beneficiary of ingenuine foreign remittances routed through M/s Dhanya General Trading FZE and M/s Tirupati Diam FZE. According to the Assessing Officer, the transaction details appearing in the seized

POOJA KANSAL,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, G.GARH, GOBINDGARH

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 224 & 225/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Kansal, The Ito, बनाम Kansla Singla & Ward -1, Associates, Gobindgarh Vs. Sco 80-81, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Abypk5904G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. T.N. Singla, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Kashyap, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Both The Appeals Pertaining To A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017- 18 Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate

144, which is bad and against the provisions of law and facts. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly passed impugned order u/s 250 without properly serving the notices to the assessee. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) has wrongly decided the case of the appellant ex-parte, as the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to provide sufficient opportunity

POOJA KANSAL,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, G.GARH, GOBINDGARH

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 224 & 225/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Kansal, The Ito, बनाम Kansla Singla & Ward -1, Associates, Gobindgarh Vs. Sco 80-81, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Abypk5904G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. T.N. Singla, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Kashyap, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Both The Appeals Pertaining To A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017- 18 Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate

144, which is bad and against the provisions of law and facts. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly passed impugned order u/s 250 without properly serving the notices to the assessee. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) has wrongly decided the case of the appellant ex-parte, as the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to provide sufficient opportunity

MANPREET SINGH BHULLAR,PARWANOO vs. ITO, PARWANOO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

bogus purchase and also initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved the assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the addition of Rs. 17,44,256/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dt. 03/06/2016 directed the A.O. to apply the GP rate of 14.50% on the aforesaid purchase

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S GOLD STAR AMCO STEELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the results, the book results as duly audited need to be accepted and the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted

Bench: 30Th Of September 2013 And, As Such, Framing Of Assessment By The Assessing Officer Without Observing Mandatory

144 dt. 09/03/2015 wherein the assessed income was determined at Rs. 3,54,58,572/- as against the returned loss of Rs. 2,46,67,816/-. 6. While passing the assessment order, the AO made an addition of Rs. 32,50,000/- under Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received by the assessee during

M/S GOLD STAR AMCO STEELS PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

In the results, the book results as duly audited need to be accepted and the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted

Bench: 30Th Of September 2013 And, As Such, Framing Of Assessment By The Assessing Officer Without Observing Mandatory

144 dt. 09/03/2015 wherein the assessed income was determined at Rs. 3,54,58,572/- as against the returned loss of Rs. 2,46,67,816/-. 6. While passing the assessment order, the AO made an addition of Rs. 32,50,000/- under Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received by the assessee during

MITHU RAM,DIRBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SUNAM

In the result, ground no. 4 & 5 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Cit(A) Proves This Fact. 2. That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient & Reasonable Cause In Not Attending To The Proceedings Before The Cit(A) Due Oversight/ Skip Of Mail Regarding The Date Of Hearing Because Busy In Filling The Income Tax Returns.

144 and confirming the order of Assessing Officer in part, thereby, sustaining the addition of Rs. 25,60,798/ raised in Ground no. 3, Rs. 7,70,000/ raised in ground no. 4 and Rs. 10,48,000/ raised in ground no, 5 of the appeal. The statement of facts before CIT(A) proves this fact. 2. That the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KITCHLU NAGAR vs. ABIR KNITS PVT. LTD., FOCAL POINT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 144, to set aside such assessment and remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. We find merit in the reasoning of the Ld. CIT(A). The approach ensures that the issues raised in the assessment, particularly with respect to unsecured loans and alleged bogus purchases

M/S SATWANT AGRO ENGINEERS,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

purchase transaction is recorded in regular books of accounts and the identity of vendor is disclosed, the amount cannot be included as unexplained investment u/ 69 of Income Tax Act 1961." . Thus in this case the amount of Rs.50,00,000.00 pertains to credit entry in books of account of firm for which it was held at page