KHALID NADEEM ALLARAKHA,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

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

3. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Nagpur erred in confirming the addition made at Rs. 1,53,976/- disallowing the commission income by assessing, therefore order passed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 4. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

3. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the exemption u/s 11 to the assessee ignoring the fact that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings has clearly demonstrated the entire trail by way of which the assessee has advanced money in the garb of property transactions just

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

3. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the exemption u/s 11 to the assessee ignoring the fact that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings has clearly demonstrated the entire trail by way of which the assessee has advanced money in the garb of property transactions just

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

3. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the exemption u/s 11 to the assessee ignoring the fact that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings has clearly demonstrated the entire trail by way of which the assessee has advanced money in the garb of property transactions just

ASHOKKUMAR GOKULCHAND SANANDA,BULDHANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Royashokkumar Gokulchand Acit, Akola Circle, Akola Sananda, Rana Traders, Vs Gandhi Chowk, Khamgaon, Dist. Buldhan, Khamgaon Pan : Adpps 755I L Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

section 35(1)(ii) of I.T. Act 1961. Such approval is noted on receipt. The deduction claimed u/s 35(1)(ii) of I.T. Act 1961 was examined in the regular assessment proceedings framed u/s 143(3) on 27/10/2016. C) The deduction has been disallowed

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

Section 143 of the Act, the AO is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than mere suspicion in support of any disallowance of expenditure. In this peculiar fact the AO was not justified in estimating the 29 Smt. AanjuSaraf disallowance

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

Section 143 of the Act, the AO is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than mere suspicion in support of any disallowance of expenditure. In this peculiar fact the AO was not justified in estimating the 29 Smt. AanjuSaraf disallowance

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

Section 143 of the Act, the AO is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than mere suspicion in support of any disallowance of expenditure. In this peculiar fact the AO was not justified in estimating the 29 Smt. AanjuSaraf disallowance

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

Section 143 of the Act, the AO is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than mere suspicion in support of any disallowance of expenditure. In this peculiar fact the AO was not justified in estimating the 29 Smt. AanjuSaraf disallowance

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

Section 143 of the Act, the AO is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than mere suspicion in support of any disallowance of expenditure. In this peculiar fact the AO was not justified in estimating the 29 Smt. AanjuSaraf disallowance

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

Section 143 of the Act, the AO is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than mere suspicion in support of any disallowance of expenditure. In this peculiar fact the AO was not justified in estimating the 29 Smt. AanjuSaraf disallowance

C-DET EXPLOSIVE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

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

disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 8.3. We find that there is no provision in section 35(1)(ii) of the Act to withdraw the recognition granted to the assessee therein. When there is no provision for withdrawal of recognition in the Act, the action of the revenue in withdrawing

C-DET EXPLOSIVE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

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

disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 8.3. We find that there is no provision in section 35(1)(ii) of the Act to withdraw the recognition granted to the assessee therein. When there is no provision for withdrawal of recognition in the Act, the action of the revenue in withdrawing

C-DET EXPLOSIVE INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2,, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

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

disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 8.3. We find that there is no provision in section 35(1)(ii) of the Act to withdraw the recognition granted to the assessee therein. When there is no provision for withdrawal of recognition in the Act, the action of the revenue in withdrawing

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

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

35,105/- 9.1 In this regard, the AR failed to explain business nexus of the donations given by the society. The Assessing officer has rightly disallowed expenditure. However, the said expenses even though if disallowed will form a part of gross total income. The Assessing Officer‟s disallowance of expenses is upheld and accordingly the Assessing Officer is directed

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

disallowances.” v) DCIT v. Frost Falcon Distilleries Ltd (2021) 214 TTJ 388 (Del-Trib) held as under: “5. The ld CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO in respect of 3 parties, however, upheld the addition of Rs.75 lakhs in respect of the share capital/ share premium received by the assessee from one M/s.Aachman Vanijya

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

disallowances.” v) DCIT v. Frost Falcon Distilleries Ltd (2021) 214 TTJ 388 (Del-Trib) held as under: “5. The ld CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO in respect of 3 parties, however, upheld the addition of Rs.75 lakhs in respect of the share capital/ share premium received by the assessee from one M/s.Aachman Vanijya

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

disallowances.” v) DCIT v. Frost Falcon Distilleries Ltd (2021) 214 TTJ 388 (Del-Trib) held as under: “5. The ld CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO in respect of 3 parties, however, upheld the addition of Rs.75 lakhs in respect of the share capital/ share premium received by the assessee from one M/s.Aachman Vanijya

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

disallowances.” v) DCIT v. Frost Falcon Distilleries Ltd (2021) 214 TTJ 388 (Del-Trib) held as under: “5. The ld CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO in respect of 3 parties, however, upheld the addition of Rs.75 lakhs in respect of the share capital/ share premium received by the assessee from one M/s.Aachman Vanijya