DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SATYAM ISPAT (NORTH EAST) LIMITED, BANDERDEWA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2011-

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

credit worthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. It is settled law that once an assessee provides details regarding identity of the share applicants/holders, their permanent account numbers, bank details, balance sheets, A/D receipt in support of filing of income tax returns, copies of Memorandum & Articles of Association etc., the share application money/capital cannot be treated as unexplained

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SATYAM ISPAT (NORTH EAST) LIMITED, BANDERDEWA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY 2011-

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

credit worthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. It is settled law that once an assessee provides details regarding identity of the share applicants/holders, their permanent account numbers, bank details, balance sheets, A/D receipt in support of filing of income tax returns, copies of Memorandum & Articles of Association etc., the share application money/capital cannot be treated as unexplained

ACCRECENT WAY MARKETING (P) LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

unexplained Share Application Money u/s 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law in upholding the addition u/s 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 when the pre- conditions for such addition did not exist in the present case. 3. For that the Learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate

TAFAJJAL HOSSAIN,AGARTALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4, AGARTALA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Tafajjal Hossain V/S. Income Tax Officer S/O Kanu Miah, Ward-4, Agartala Prabhurampur, Bishalgarh, Dist. Sespahijala, Tripura- 799102 [Pan No Abuph 8863 K] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent None अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Rabindro Singh, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13-09-2019 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)-Shillong’S Order Dated 10.02.2017 Passed In Case No.Agt-13/2013-14, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case Called Twice. None Appears At The Assessee’S Behest. The Registry Has Already Sent Rpad Notice For Today’S Hearing. We Therefore Proceeded Ex Parte Against The Assessee.

unexplained cash credits u/s40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 195 disallowance of Rs.58,39,981/- and 69C addition(s) involving figures of Rs.26

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. PAWAN CEMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 5. When the matter travelled before ld. CIT(A) he on observing that the addition made by ld. AO is only on the basis of the statement given during the course of search on 31.08.2016 which stands retracted by the assessee by filing an affidavit on 05.09.2016 and there being no incriminating

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. PAWAN CEMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 5. When the matter travelled before ld. CIT(A) he on observing that the addition made by ld. AO is only on the basis of the statement given during the course of search on 31.08.2016 which stands retracted by the assessee by filing an affidavit on 05.09.2016 and there being no incriminating

SIKSHA NIKETAN H.S. SCHOOL,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee’s former two grievances sought to delete the corresponding receipts treated as unexplained income u/s 68 of the Act. Its third and fourth substantive grievances challenged correctness of both the lower authorities claim treating its payments involving different sums made to Neera Chatterjee as excessive inviting sec. 40(A)(2) disallowance

SIKSHA NIKETAN H.S. SCHOOL,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee’s former two grievances sought to delete the corresponding receipts treated as unexplained income u/s 68 of the Act. Its third and fourth substantive grievances challenged correctness of both the lower authorities claim treating its payments involving different sums made to Neera Chatterjee as excessive inviting sec. 40(A)(2) disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH, DIBRUGARH vs. SANTOSH BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 104/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Smt. Santosh Bamalwa Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh Vs Ground Floor Mahalaya Road C/O A.K. Varma Dibrugarh - 786001 [Pan: Aedpb9900P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 34/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Santosh Bamalwa Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh Vs Ground Floor Mahalaya Road C/O A.K. Varma Dibrugarh - 786001 [Pan: Aedpb9900P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Bhowmick, Jcit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/11/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Central, North-East Region, Guwahati (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 14/07/2023, Passed U/S

unexplained cash credit. In appeal before the ld. CIT(A), assessee got relief on the ground that no incriminating material were found during the course of search pertaining to the alleged transaction giving rise to alleged long term capital gain and since the year under consideration is Assessment Year 2012-13 and the time limit to select the case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA vs. KALIKA JEWELLERS, AGARTALA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 85/Gty/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Kalika Jewellers Tax, Circle-Agartala Vs H.G.B. Road Agartala Tripura (W) - 799001 [Pan: Aafj5678K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Modi, Fca Revenue By : Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - Shillong, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 03/06/2016, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2010-11, On The Following Grounds:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Made By A.O. Of Rs.8,81,708/- On Account Of Unexplained Expenditure. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.4,02,36,806/- Made By A.O. On Account Of Undisclosed Stock. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.16,20,750/- Made By A.O. On Account Of Making Charges U/S 40(A)(Ia). 4. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.1,34,640/- & Rs.83,385/- Made By A.O. On Account Of Advertisement Expense U/S 40(A)(Ia).” 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In Jewellery Business. Income Of Rs.56,80,854/- Was Declared In The Return Filed On 23/09/2010. The Case Was Manually Selected For Scrutiny Followed By Service Of Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Of The Act. The Ld. Assessing Officer Called For Various

cash credit limit and it was merely on an estimate basis and the same should have been ignore by the Assessing Officer and should have relied only on the audited financial statements. However, at this juncture, we differ with the contentions of the assessee because the estimates are not too far from the actuals and there may be a variation

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised

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

unexplained cash credits received. 3. Whether a fact emanating from the statement recorded during search operation could be sufficient to initiate and complete the proceedings u/s 153A/153D of the Income Tax Act. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add/modify/alter any or all the grounds during the course of hearing/pendency of appeal.” 4. As far as the Cross Objections raised