ACIT, CIRCLE- 3, NAGPUR vs. M/S SOLARIES HOLDING LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The Acit Vs. M/S. Solaries Holdings Ltd. Circle-3, Thapar House, 124, Nagpur Janpath, New Delhi Panno.:Aahcs 59040 B Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shripiyushkolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani (Adv.) Date Of Hearing: 18/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit-Ii, Nagpur Dated 01/09/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2008-09 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

disallowance @ 0.30% of circular trading purchases of Rs.2,83,77,87,618-/-. Accordingly, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.’’ (I) In the case of real income arising on transaction was declared accepted. Addition of gross value of purchases and sale is contrary to settled principle that assessment has to be of real income. The ld. AR relied decision

I.T.O. WARD -2(2),, NAGPUR vs. SHRI RAMANSINGH BALBIRSINGH SWANNI, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Ito Vs. Ramsingh Balbirsingh Swanni Ward 2(2) Room No. 315, Prop: Industrial Supply Syndicate 3Rd Floor Aayakar Bhawan Bf-2, Amar Vihar, Kamptee Road Telangkhedi Road, Nagpur Civil Lines, Nagpur Pan No.:Aybps 9233 L Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Vitthal M Bhosle Jcit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Abhay Agarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/07/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A)-4, Nagpur Dated 17/05/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2009-10 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

bogus purchase addition was required to be made in the case of the appellant. The said reasons have been specified in para 2.5. The said reasons as well the corresponding refutation as to why they do not constitute a good reason to make a disallowance

M/S SHREE SAIBABA CONSTRUCTION,,NAGPUR vs. CIT-IV,, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowed the following purchases totaling to Rs. 61,00,242.00/-. The notice u/s 263 states as under, that you have debited expenses of Rs. 5,10,46,326/- under the head- URD purchases. Out of these, A.O. had examined URD purchases of Rs. 1,01,57,105/- in detail and found that about 60% of these were bogus

VGI MARKETING DIVISION,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, AKOLA

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance only to the extent of 3% of the bogus purchase. With regard to the aspect of the assessing officer

SUNRISE STRUCTURALS & ENGINEERING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roysunrise Structural & Acit/Dcit, Circle-4, Engineering P. Ltd., A10, Vs Nagpur Hingna Midc, Nagpur (Urban), Nagpur-440016 Pan : Aaccs 3220 M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 O R D E R

purchase made by assessee is from bogus party and therefore it was correctly disallowed in the assessment framed by invoking

M/S SHREE PALSIDDHA CONSTRUCTION,BULDHANA vs. PRINCIPAL C.I.T. -1,, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Shree Palsiddha Construction Vs. Pr.Cit-1, Sakharkheda, Nagpur. Taluka Sindhkhedraja, Buldhana-443202. Pan No.: Ablfs 9009 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit-1, Nagpur Dated 08/03/2017 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2009-10 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Pcit Erred In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 263 & Thereby Setting Aside Order Passed By Assessing Officer 2. Assessee Craves Leave To Add & Alter Any Other Ground That May Be Taken At The Time Of Hearing.” 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Civil Contractor. Return Of Income Was Filed On 03/12/2009 Declaring Total Income Of 2

bogus purchase and brought to tax the gross profit on the said purchase to the taxation. Moreover, the Hon’ble Bombay 8 ITA 194/NAG/2017_ M/s Shree Palsiddha Construction Sakharkheda Vs Pr.CIT High Court in the case of PCIT Vs Mohommad Haji Adam & Co. vide its order dated 11/02/2019 had also restricted the additions under similar circumstances to the gross profit

ZIM LABORATORIES LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 99/Nag/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Zim Laboratories Ltd. Ground Floor, Sadodaya Gyan, Nelson Square, Opp. Nadt, Nagpur-440 013. Pan : Aaacz0200E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent

purchases of machinery in question was genuine, therefore, no disallowance of depreciation including additional depreciation claimed u/s. 32(1)(iia) of the Act was called for in its hands. As regards the observations of the Pr. CIT that the assessee had indulged in bogus

ZIM LABORATORIES LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 14,33,776/- on air handling system purchased from M/s Real Traders being bogus purchases

ZIM LABORATORIES LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 14,33,776/- on air handling system purchased from M/s Real Traders being bogus purchases

ZIM LABORATORIES LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 14,33,776/- on air handling system purchased from M/s Real Traders being bogus purchases

MOHANLAL KALAJII SUTHAR,NAGPUR vs. DY, CIT CIR.1, NAGPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.22/Nag/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mohanlal Kalaji Suthar, The Dy.Cit, Circle-1, Vinayaka Metal Indus, Shop Vs. Nagpur. No.04, Sai Wadi Sankul, Midc T Point, Amravati Road, Wadi, Nagpur – 440023. Pan: Arrps 5022 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe – Dr Date Of Hearing 14/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2023

disallowing the alleged bogus purchases of Rs.28,70,544/- sourced from hawala operators. 4. The Revenue at this stage sought

GANGADHAR NAGORAO NIKAM,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE - 1 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy

purchases of ` 56,00,790/–, on account of disallowance of bogus purchases. The assessee being aggrieved, challenged the said addition

M/S. UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.45/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Unijules Life Sciences The Assistant Ltd., V Commissioner Of Income B-35/36, Midc, S Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Kamleshwar, Nagpur. Nagpur – 441501 Pan: Aaacu8032D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani – Adv.-Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 08.11.2011 For The A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From The Order Under Section 153A R.W.S 143(3) Of M/S.Unijule Life Sciences Ltd., [A]

disallowance of depreciation on purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 2 M/s.Unijule

SUBHASH BADRIPRASAD SHAHU,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(3), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesubhash Badriprasad Shahu, Plot No.84, Near Annapurna Dall Mill, Bagad Ganj, Small Factory Area ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 008. Maharashtra. Pan – Agqps9660N V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(3), Nagpur Assessee By :Shri. Abhay Agrawal.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

bogus purchases under section 69C of the Act. 4. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred in making the disallowance

M/S UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of depreciation on purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 7) On the facts

M/S UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowance of depreciation on purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 7) On the facts

M/S. UNIFUES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NAGPUR

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.419/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S.Unijules Life Sciences The Assistant Ltd., V Commissioner Of Income B 35/36, Midc Kalmehwar, S Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur – 441501. Nagpur. Pan: Aaacu8032D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 08.11.2021 Emanating From The Order Under Section 153A R.W.S 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 Dated 30.03.2016. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : M/S.Unijules Life Sciences Ltd., [A]

disallowance of depreciation on purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 7) On the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

purchases as bogus u/s 69C. I, therefore, hold that the impugned addition is not sustainable in law also.” The Revenue being aggrieved is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has not filed any details before the Assessing Officer and the expenditure incurred by the assessee is bogus in nature. He further submitted

SHRIRAM DADAJI MATTE,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T CIR.-1, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

purchases from M/s. Mahavir Enterprises and M/s. Harsh Corporation as bogus and he disallowed ` 28,885 on account of purchase