AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

purchases either drew a blank or as in the case of Shri Vikas Bansal, the facts of bogus accommodation entries were confirmed. Thereafter, a total addition of Rs. 202,30,39,718/- was made by the Ld. AO. 3.1 Before the Ld. CIT(A) also, it was averred that the assessee was only an entry provider and hence should

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

147 of the Act or not. 7 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 & Assessment Year: 2013-2014 ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Limited 8. Before proceeding further, we deem it pertinent to take note of the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer and the copy of which is available on pages no. 26 to 30, which read as under:- “1. The assessee company

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

147 of the Act or not. 7 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 & Assessment Year: 2013-2014 ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Limited 8. Before proceeding further, we deem it pertinent to take note of the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer and the copy of which is available on pages no. 26 to 30, which read as under:- “1. The assessee company

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. VISHAL BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA (HUF), DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. SHEETAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINAY BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. RAVI BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. USHA BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. MEENAKSHI BAMALWA SONI, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. BHAGWATI DEVII BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. MADAN LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. PRAMOD KUMAR BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

147, 148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search