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

purchases as bogus and made addition of Rs.6,77,58,435/- u/s 69C, taxing it u/s 115BBE. 3. Being aggrieved, assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A), who upheld the reopening of assessment

ITO, WARD- 1)1), NAGPUR vs. AXYKNO ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

purchase bills and that the assessee M/s. Axykno Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.47/Nag./2019 is one of the many beneficiaries of the business of accommodation entries run by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain. In view of this, a proposal under section 263 of the Act was sent by the Assessing Officer to the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax–1, Nagpur

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

DY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX , CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S N KUMAR CONSTRUCTION CO .PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

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

bogus. Therefore, it was mandatory for the Revenue to produce A for cross-examination by the appellant on their specific demand in this regard. There may well be instances where the reopening may pass muster in light of some facts, but those facts 21 M/s. N. Kumar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2010–11 by themselves may turn

PRADEEP DATTATRAYA BANGINWAR,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 28/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Pradeep Dattatraya Banginwar, At- Trimurti Sales, Datta Chowk, Yavatmal-445 001. Pan : Abcpb5111C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri P.M. Gandhi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :17.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2022

bogus exempt LTCG of Rs. 14.75 lac (supra) on sale of one lac shares of M/s Comfort Intech Ltd. is not only incorrect, but in the true sense can safely be held as non-existent. Observing, that the “reason to believe” on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened was factually incorrect, the Assessing Officer

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

reopening of assessment and the additions made in the assessment order passedu/s 147 of the Act on 25/12/2018. Facts of the case: Assessee filed return of income under section 139(1) of I T Act on 17/10/2016 declaring income of Rs.4,60,44,360/–. Case was selected for scrutiny and various notices were issued which were duly replied

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

bogus purchases forming the sole reason of reopening. This indeed is coupled with the clinching fact that there is no discussion at all in the assessment

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

reopening of assessment. Since we have deleted the addition on merits, this legal ground becomes academic in nature and accordingly we leave the same open and decline to adjudicate the same. 18. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed." Thus, un view of the facts discussed hereinabove and respectfully following Thus, in view of the decisions

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

reopening of assessment. Since we have deleted the addition on merits, this legal ground becomes academic in nature and accordingly we leave the same open and decline to adjudicate the same. 18. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed." Thus, un view of the facts discussed hereinabove and respectfully following Thus, in view of the decisions

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

reopening of assessment. Since we have deleted the addition on merits, this legal ground becomes academic in nature and accordingly we leave the same open and decline to adjudicate the same. 18. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed." Thus, un view of the facts discussed hereinabove and respectfully following Thus, in view of the decisions

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

bogus, when, on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15 had already been unabated / completed, since scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) had been completed on 18/08/2016 (prior to the date of search) and no assessment was pending for the assessment year 2014-15 on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019 and also, there

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

bogus, when, on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15 had already been unabated / completed, since scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) had been completed on 18/08/2016 (prior to the date of search) and no assessment was pending for the assessment year 2014-15 on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019 and also, there

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

bogus, when, on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15 had already been unabated / completed, since scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) had been completed on 18/08/2016 (prior to the date of search) and no assessment was pending for the assessment year 2014-15 on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019 and also, there

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

bogus, when, on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15 had already been unabated / completed, since scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) had been completed on 18/08/2016 (prior to the date of search) and no assessment was pending for the assessment year 2014-15 on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019 and also, there

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

bogus, when, on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15 had already been unabated / completed, since scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) had been completed on 18/08/2016 (prior to the date of search) and no assessment was pending for the assessment year 2014-15 on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019 and also, there

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

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

bogus, when, on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15 had already been unabated / completed, since scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) had been completed on 18/08/2016 (prior to the date of search) and no assessment was pending for the assessment year 2014-15 on the date of search i.e., 11/07/2019 and also, there

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION CIRCLE NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VIDHARBHA BAHUUDESHIYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2017-18

reopened on the basis of information that the assessee had obtained loan from a paper company M/s. Aneri Fincap Ltd which was engaged in providing bogus accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued to the assessee on 2 25.06.2021. Subsequently, in the light

PARSHURAM FORGE PRIVATE LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -1 , NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

purchases. 4. We note that the assessee is a company and filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.46,84,066/- which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, on receipt of information from Sales Tax Department, the AO reopened the said assessment by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act on account of bogus

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES LTD., NAGPUR

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

purchased shares of Grace Income Industries shown to be sourced from Rs.3,78,25,000/- Amber associates Rs.15,00,000/- S. N. Coal & Coke Rs.1,24,25,000/- Kisan Bedi Rs.40,00,000/- R. Subramaniyam Rs.30,00,000/- Virgo Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Rs.1,17,50,000/- Ravi Steel Rs.51,50,000/- Rs.3,78,25,000/- The genuineness, creditworthiness and identity