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

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

section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act therefore such assessment is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. I.T.A. Nos. 32 & 33/GTY/2024 Amit Kumar 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in law in upholding the disallowance of purchases of Rs.86,47,78,624/-ignoring the submission of appellant

NISHA RANI,C/O SAHAY ENTERPRISES vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN,

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumarnisha Rani, I.T.O., Bedi Market, At Road, Ward-1(2), Vs. Guwahati-781001 (Assam) Guwahati. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afjpr 7852 P Assessee By : Shri Vishesh Surana, Fca. Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing: 09/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 13/03/2026 O R D E R

disallowed specially when the corresponding sales were not doubted and books of account were not rejected under Section 145(3) of the Act. At the most

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

disallowance. It is evident that in the case on hand, the work awarded to the Appellant by the three (03) contract awarding parties was sub- contracted by the Appellant to M/s Silverpoint Infratech Limited. Purportedly based on some statements, the AO had inferred that the entire work carried out by M/s Silverpoint Infratech Limited was bogus. Except for these statements

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

disallowance. It is evident that in the case on hand, the work awarded to the Appellant by the three (03) contract awarding parties was sub- contracted by the Appellant to M/s Silverpoint Infratech Limited. Purportedly based on some statements, the AO had inferred that the entire work carried out by M/s Silverpoint Infratech Limited was bogus. Except for these statements