BALJEET SINGH,KANPUR vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2)(1), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 69A of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the learned CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 13/08/20225, the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being further aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. (C) During the course of hearing before the Tribunal, the learned Counsel

TACK EXIM PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE2(3)(1), KANPUR

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Tack Exim Pvt. Limited V. Asstt. Commissioner Of 11/18-A, Pokharpur Income Tax, Jajmau, Kanpur Circle 2(3)(1), Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aadct7929D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 09 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29 11 2024 O R D E R

purchases and sales were also filed before the AO as well as copies of accounts of various parties, from whom cash payments had been received, were also filed along with list of debtors. The Ld. A.R. also submitted that no discrepancy was pointed out with respect to the stock also. 5.1 It was further argued by the Ld. A.R. that

ACIT, RANGE-1, LUCKNOW vs. MAA RAKTDANTIKA CONTRACTORS AND SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

bogus sales. This is not permissible by law. The Delhi high court in the case of JW Wires has held as under: 1. “In this reference made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, on a reference application filed by the assessee before it, the solitary question which is referred for our consideration, reads as follows: "Whether on the facts

M/S. MAA RAKLTDANTIKA CONTRACTORS AND SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,LUCKNOW vs. THE DCIT/ACIT, RANGE-4, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

bogus sales. This is not permissible by law. The Delhi high court in the case of JW Wires has held as under: 1. “In this reference made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, on a reference application filed by the assessee before it, the solitary question which is referred for our consideration, reads as follows: "Whether on the facts

BADRI PRASAD VISHWA NATH JEWELS,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT-2, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

bogus by the Assessing Officer. He also submitted that the VAT return filed by the assessee was also accepted by VAT authorities and it should be inferred that purchase and sales of the assessee shown in the books of account were accepted by VAT authorities. He further placed reliance on the decided precedents which are referred to in the foregoing

GURDAS MAL ARORA,KANPUR vs. THE A O CIRCLE-1(2)(1), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshragurdas Mal Arora V. The Assessing Officer, 21/L/4, Daboli, Circle-1(2)(1) Kanpur. 16/69, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Afepm4342J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit-Dr O R D E R

69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 as discussed in para 6 of the assessment order and addition of Rs. 23,06,000/- u/s 40A(2)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Addition of Rs. 1,93,48,000/- on Cash Deposit from Sale u/s 68/69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961: 3. That the appellant humbly submits before your honour

HORIZON DWELLINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,BAREILLY vs. PCIT, BAREILLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriahorizon Dwellings Pvt Ltd V. Pcit, Bareilly, Navjeevan Appartments, Income Tax Department, Opposite Parag Factory, Bareilly (Up)-243001. Badaun Road, Kargaina, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aacch6839F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

69A in respect of on-money receipts, however, said order was set aside by Tribunal holding that AO had made detailed enquiries in respect of on- money receipts and said view was also confirmed by High Court, SLP filed against decision of High Court was to be dismissed Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sumatichand Tolamal Gouti

KASHI NATH SETH SARRAF PRIVATE LIMITED,HARDOI vs. ACIT, SITAPUR, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

section 269ST of the Act. Further it is not in dispute\nthat the aforesaid total sales of Rs.1,67,36,087/- (consisting of each\ntransaction exceeding Rs.2,00,000/- in cash) were not made through serially\nnumbered sales vouchers. Instead, these transactions were interspersed\nwith other sale transactions in cash, below Rs.2,00,000/-. These facts\nclearly establish that

SUMIT KESARWANI,KANPUR vs. ITO-1(1)(4), KANPUR

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sumit Kesarwani V. Ito 1(1)(F) 52/26, Naya Ganj Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Biopk6450P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 12 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 31 12 2024 O R D E R

purchases and sales of Match Boxes, Pan Masala, Cigarettes and Agarbattis. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 06.11.2017, declaring a total income of Rs.2,36,130/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the reason that there was an abnormal increase ITA No.98/LKW/2024 Page

ALLIANCE NIRMAAN LIMITED,BAREILLY vs. PCIT, BAREILLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

69A in respect of on-money receipts, however, said order was set aside by Tribunal\nholding that AO had made detailed enquiries in respect of on-money receipts and said view was\nalso confirmed by High Court, SLP filed against decision of High Court was to be dismissed\nSupreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sumatichand Tolamal Gouti