DCIT., CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD vs. ROHINI MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2022-23 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Rohini Minerals Private Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 3(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaccr0773N (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S.K. Gupta, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr 05.02.2025 Date Of Hearing: Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2025

Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Therefore, called upon the assessee to furnish relevant evidences, including nature of purchases and other documents like purchase bills, ledger accounts, e-way bills, delivery challans. In response, the assessee has furnished details of purchases, including purchases from SRHPL along with ledger accounts, bills and vouchers for the year under consideration. The assessee

DCIT., CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD vs. S.P.Y AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

54,47,500/- u/s.68 of the Act towards share application money,\nwhich is deleted by the Ld. CIT(A).\nb) The second issue arises out of the addition of Rs.23,31,50,007/-\nmade by the Ld. AO on account of bogus purchases and the addition\nhas been restricted to 8% of Rs.23

S.P.Y AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

54,47,500/- u/s.68 of the Act towards share application money,\nwhich is deleted by the Ld. CIT(A).\nb) The second issue arises out of the addition of Rs.23,31,50,007/-\nmade by the Ld. AO on account of bogus purchases and the addition\nhas been restricted to 8% of Rs.23

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

54,98,600/- towards unexplained work-in-progress capitalized in books without appreciating the fact that a detailed show cause notice was issued covering the issues of search involving claim of non-genuine/bogus purchases/ unexplained & unverifiable expenses, as applicable to various vendors as noticed during the search and survey proceedings conducted in the group cases

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

54,98,600/- towards unexplained work-in-progress capitalized in books without appreciating the fact that a detailed show cause notice was issued covering the issues of search involving claim of non-genuine/bogus purchases/ unexplained & unverifiable expenses, as applicable to various vendors as noticed during the search and survey proceedings conducted in the group cases

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELCOM INFRASTRUTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

54,98,600/- towards unexplained work-in-progress capitalized in books without appreciating the fact that a detailed show cause notice was issued covering the issues of search involving claim of non-genuine/bogus purchases/ unexplained & unverifiable expenses, as applicable to various vendors as noticed during the search and survey proceedings conducted in the group cases

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

54,98,600/- towards unexplained work-in-progress capitalized in books without appreciating the fact that a detailed show cause notice was issued covering the issues of search involving claim of non-genuine/bogus purchases/ unexplained & unverifiable expenses, as applicable to various vendors as noticed during the search and survey proceedings conducted in the group cases

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELCOM INFRASTRUTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

54,98,600/- towards unexplained work-in-progress capitalized in books without appreciating the fact that a detailed show cause notice was issued covering the issues of search involving claim of non-genuine/bogus purchases/ unexplained & unverifiable expenses, as applicable to various vendors as noticed during the search and survey proceedings conducted in the group cases

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

54,98,600/- towards unexplained work-in-progress capitalized in books without appreciating the fact that a detailed show cause notice was issued covering the issues of search involving claim of non-genuine/bogus purchases/ unexplained & unverifiable expenses, as applicable to various vendors as noticed during the search and survey proceedings conducted in the group cases

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

54,568/- invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Thus, the Ld. AO made an aggregate disallowance of Rs. 74,59,428/- in the hands of the assessee U/s. 40A(2)(b) of the Act. On appeal, The Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the genuineness of the expenses incurred by the assessee