THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 03, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

section 254 or section 251 which would indicate that the appellate authorities are confined to consider only the objections raised before it or allowed to be raised before it either by the assessee or by the Department, as the case may be. They can consider the entire proceedings to determine the tax liability of an assessee. In case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI vs. FORTUNE VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

disallowances. 10. We find no infirmity in the aforesaid act of the learned Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. "(emphasis supplied) 43. Gainful reference may also be made to the following observations made by the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs IBC Knowledge Park (P) Ltd. [69 taxmann.com 108], which is as follows: "Materials such as books

ARUNACHAL POLICE HOUSING & WELFARE CORPORATION LIMITED,PAPUMPARE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-ITANAGAR, ITANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

disallowing the exemption claimed under section 10(26B). Assessee paid the demand raised thereon of Rs.45,27,145/-. 2.2. Penalty

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)

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

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

RAITANI ENGINEERING WORKS (P) LTD,GUWAHATI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-3, GUWAHATI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Raitani Engineering Works V/S. Jcut, Range-3, (P) Ltd., Railway Colony, Aayakar Bhawan, Pan Bazar, Guwahati- G.S. Road, Christan 781001 Basti, Guwahati- [Pan No.Aaacr 6691 K] 781005 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Assessee Shri Rabindro Singh, Jcit, Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 02-07-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 06-09-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Guwahati’S Order Dated 19.02.2014 Passed In Case No.Guwa-60/2013-14, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. The Assessee’S Detailed Paper Book Running Into 132 Pages Comprising Of Various Documents, The Assessing Officer’S Notice During Scrutiny, Cash Book Of Assessee’S Head Office, Computation, Financial Statements; Stands Perused.

section 145 of the Act and so estimated the net profit at Rs.2,86,70,423/- @ 6% of the total turnover i.e. Rs.47,78,40,398/- over and above 3.78% of net profit already disclosed by the assessee. aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal CIT(A), who was pleased to confirm the action of AO. aggrieved, assessee is before