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

ALFIYA AYAZALI SAYYAD,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

bogus purchases of Rs.1,49,43,240. That penalty cannot be levied when the addition has been made on estimated

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]

bogus purchases vide its 3 M/s.Unijule Life Sciences Ltd., [A] order passed u/s. 153A r.w.s. 143(3) dated 30.03.2016. for the year under consideration. 2) Cash expenses have been added on the basis of document found at the time of search and seizure. 3) Depreciation disallowed. 4) Any other additional point can be taken at any later point of time

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

purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 7) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO grossly erred in making and the CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs. 194,04,18,971 representing disallowance of bad debts written off debited

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

purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 7) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO grossly erred in making and the CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs. 194,04,18,971 representing disallowance of bad debts written off debited

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]

purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 7) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the 2 M/s.Unijules Life Sciences Ltd., [A] assessment being a case of unabated assessment, the additions to the extent not emanated from incriminating material found during the course of search

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.1, NAGPUR vs. SHRI HEMRAJ PUNEKAR,

In the result this appeal by the Revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya. (S.M.C.)

purchased these goods and same were just the books entries. This amount of Rs.35,48,955/- is disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” 3. Upon assessee's appeal Learned CIT(Appeals) deleted the addition

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

bogus STCL through his connivance with entry operators / exit providers. No such enquiry or investigation is seen carried by the AO other than borrowing information to be used against the assessee from the general report of Investigation Directorate. The claim of the assessee appears to have been rejected more on the basis of presumption rather than evidence. The fact also

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

bogus STCL through his connivance with entry operators / exit providers. No such enquiry or investigation is seen carried by the AO other than borrowing information to be used against the assessee from the general report of Investigation Directorate. The claim of the assessee appears to have been rejected more on the basis of presumption rather than evidence. The fact also

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

bogus STCL through his connivance with entry operators / exit providers. No such enquiry or investigation is seen carried by the AO other than borrowing information to be used against the assessee from the general report of Investigation Directorate. The claim of the assessee appears to have been rejected more on the basis of presumption rather than evidence. The fact also

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

bogus being duly supported by third party evidences, the addition made by the AO without objectively and subjectively disproving the evidences so filed, and solely on the basis of statements recorded and information shared by officers other than the Assessing Officer, makes the addition grossly illegal and liable to be deleted as per law and in the interest of justice

GANESH PURANCHAND AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(1), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleganesh Puranchand Agrawal, 120, Chikli Layout, Kalamna Marketroad, ……………. Appellant Nagpur-440008, Maharashtra. Pan – Afypa6620B V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–4(1), ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440008, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Abhishek Kumar.Ar Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing – 17/10/2025 Date Of Order –17/10/2025

purchases made from Shri Vijay Madhukar Harde (Prop of Pyramid 2 Ganesh Puranchand Agrawal ITA no.575/NAG./2025 Corporation) to be bogus to the extent of Rs. 25,61,869/ vide its order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B dated 19/01/2024 for the year under consideration. 4. Whether the Hon'ble CIT(A) is justified in not making addition to the tune

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

purchase of assets allegedly held bogus which is illegal, and which deserves to be deleted as per law. 6) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO grossly erred in making and the CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs. 60,00,000 representing unaccounted income which is illegal, and which deserves

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

penalty of overloading of trucks. It was the contention of the assessee that this issue was also recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order vide Para–9. We have gone through the order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the contentions of the assessee and found that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

penalty of overloading of trucks. It was the contention of the assessee that this issue was also recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order vide Para–9. We have gone through the order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the contentions of the assessee and found that

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

penalty of overloading of trucks. It was the contention of the assessee that this issue was also recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order vide Para–9. We have gone through the order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the contentions of the assessee and found that

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

penalty of overloading of trucks. It was the contention of the assessee that this issue was also recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order vide Para–9. We have gone through the order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the contentions of the assessee and found that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

penalty of overloading of trucks. It was the contention of the assessee that this issue was also recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order vide Para–9. We have gone through the order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the contentions of the assessee and found that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

penalty of overloading of trucks. It was the contention of the assessee that this issue was also recorded by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order vide Para–9. We have gone through the order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the contentions of the assessee and found that