GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus and unsecured loans was also disallowed and a sum of Rs. 47,10,000/- was also added to the income and the assessment was made accordingly. 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA vs. SHRI SATYAJIT SAHA, AGARTALA

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

purchases through LCS, Agartala should be Rs. 15,02,40,765/- and not Rs. 13,89,81,195/-.” 2.2 The revenue has filed the present appeal with the following grounds: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in granting relief on account of excess sundry debtors. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred granting relief on account

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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A 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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A search

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

89,732 PB-16 BAMALWA India Ltd. TOTAL ADDITION 64,48,50,444 10. Keeping in mind the above details, brief facts are that all these assessees are regular income-tax payer. They were filing their returns regularly and they have filed their returns in these assessment years also under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. A search