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

loss to the assessee. e. Such companies were seen to have little financial credentials, no profitability and no apparent explanation for in prices followed by a steep fall in price of shares. Besides, abrupt rise in price there are statements of brokers/ entry providers who have accepted that they were involved in the scam of price rigging to facilitate accommodation

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

loss to the assessee. e. Such companies were seen to have little financial credentials, no profitability and no apparent explanation for in prices followed by a steep fall in price of shares. Besides, abrupt rise in price there are statements of brokers/ entry providers who have accepted that they were involved in the scam of price rigging to facilitate accommodation

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

purchases. 9. Any other question to be raised at the time of appeal. 10. It is humbly prayed that the Order of CIT (A) be set aside and Order of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4 Zim Laboratories Ltd. 5. On appeal, insofar as addition of ` 1,56,63,908, made by the Assessing Officer being excess commission paid

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

purchases. 9. Any other question to be raised at the time of appeal. 10. It is humbly prayed that the Order of CIT (A) be set aside and Order of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4 Zim Laboratories Ltd. 5. On appeal, insofar as addition of ` 1,56,63,908, made by the Assessing Officer being excess commission paid

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

purchases. 9. Any other question to be raised at the time of appeal. 10. It is humbly prayed that the Order of CIT (A) be set aside and Order of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 4 Zim Laboratories Ltd. 5. On appeal, insofar as addition of ` 1,56,63,908, made by the Assessing Officer being excess commission paid

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON vs. RENUKA OIL INDUSTRIES, KHAMGAON

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

setting up the warehouse for stockkeeping as per agreement with CWC and the but of commencement of operations of the warehouse w.e.f. 17.10.2022. Further. the Inspector's positive field enquiry report, dated 17.03.2016, conducted during as assessment proceedings, the declaration of rental income of Rs. 87.44,935 on letting off the warehouse in the ITR which indicates completion of construction

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the order of the assessing officer” 3. Fact in Brief:- The facts, as culled out from the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) are that, on 29/03/2016, the assessee its return of income electronically declaring net taxable income at ` 76,95,280. The assessee had purchased

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 under section 69C." In the case of CIT v. Bhagwati Developers Pvt. Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 658 (Cal.) it is held that if the source of the expenditure is explained section 69C has no applicability. It is also respectfully submitted that the addition u/s. 69C has been made merely on suspicion and conjectures without refuting any facts

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

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the order of the assessing officer”\nFact in Brief :- The facts, as culled out from the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) are that, on 14/01/2015, the assessee filed its return of income electronically declaring net taxable income at ₹32,63,962. The assessee had purchased

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

JASIBAI DAYARAM AMLANI,AMRAVATI vs. DCIT AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

bogus and disallowed the same and assessed at ₹ 30,79,080/- 6. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), but failed to succeed. Now assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that fair market rent estimated by the Ld.AO is a very higher side 4 ITA.No.749/NAG/2025 (Jasibai Dayaram Amlani) because

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , AKOLA

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

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

loss account is particularly concerning and undermines the claim. 6 Ravindra Madanlal Khandelwal ITA no.375/Nag./2024 Compliance with Tax Laws: Proper adherence to accounting standards and tax laws is crucial. Expenses claimed for tax deductions must be transparently recorded and justifiably linked to income generation. Based on the analysis of the documents presented and the legal framework

I.T.O. WARD -1, AMRAVATI vs. SHRI SANJAY NANASAHEB BHARSAKALE, AMRAVATI

In the result, the appeal of the department is rejected

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

Loss Account, Balance Sheet and Schedules 3] Coy of Cash Book 4] Copy of statement u/s 131 of Ujjwal Ganeshrao Khedkar 5] Copy of statement u/s 131 of Bhagwant Sitaram Neware 6] Copy of statement u/s 131 of Anish Gyanchand Mahajan 7] Copy of statement u/s 131 of M. Brahim and Shri Mohd. Ibrahim 8] Copy of statement

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

set out by the AO were, in fact, given. 55 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case where literally a mere stamp is affixed. It is signed

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

set out by the AO were, in fact, given. 55 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case where literally a mere stamp is affixed. It is signed