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

credits received during the assessment year 2014-15 and it has brought forward from earlier/preceding year i.e., assessment year 2013-14; and in such a situation, it 39 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 cannot be added under section 68 in as mistakenly proposed by the Assessing Officer and this mistake of the Assessing

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

credits received during the assessment year 2014-15 and it has brought forward from earlier/preceding year i.e., assessment year 2013-14; and in such a situation, it 39 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 cannot be added under section 68 in as mistakenly proposed by the Assessing Officer and this mistake of the Assessing

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

credits received during the assessment year 2014-15 and it has brought forward from earlier/preceding year i.e., assessment year 2013-14; and in such a situation, it 39 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 cannot be added under section 68 in as mistakenly proposed by the Assessing Officer and this mistake of the Assessing

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

credits received during the assessment year 2014-15 and it has brought forward from earlier/preceding year i.e., assessment year 2013-14; and in such a situation, it 39 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 cannot be added under section 68 in as mistakenly proposed by the Assessing Officer and this mistake of the Assessing

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

credits received during the assessment year 2014-15 and it has brought forward from earlier/preceding year i.e., assessment year 2013-14; and in such a situation, it 39 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 cannot be added under section 68 in as mistakenly proposed by the Assessing Officer and this mistake of the Assessing

AXYKNO CAPITAL SERVICES LTD,,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, NAGPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”). The facts and grounds in both the appeals being similar in nature, the appeals are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. The grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals are as under:- 2 ITA 178/NAG/ 2017 AXYKNO CAPITAL SERVICES

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

unexplained cash credit may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year. In this, case the legislative mandate is not in terms of the words \"shall be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year\". The Supreme Court while interpreting similar phraseology used in section

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

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68. The issue in dispute is covered in favour of appellant by the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. reported at 333 ITR 100 (Bom) wherein it has been held that the amount of share premium cannot be treated as income u/s

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

credit of Rs.15,00,000/-. We respectfully object to the\nabove observations and allegations made by the AO as the same are based on\nconjectures and surmises of AO without providing opportunity of being heard\nto assessee and also without properly verifying the facts of the case.\n29\nShri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain\nITA no.53, to 59/Nag./2024

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

credit entries in form of share premium, loans were received from shell companies who are part of financial manoeuvring to legitimise illicit money and evade taxes and lack of genuineness in actual operations of shell companies. 21. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) has deleted the addition by superficially assessing the genuineness

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

credit entries in form of share premium, loans were received from shell companies who are part of financial manoeuvring to legitimise illicit money and evade taxes and lack of genuineness in actual operations of shell companies. 21. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) has deleted the addition by superficially assessing the genuineness

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA RADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

credit entries in form of share premium, loans were received from shell companies who are part of financial manoeuvring to legitimise illicit money and evade taxes and lack of genuineness in actual operations of shell companies. 21. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) has deleted the addition by superficially assessing the genuineness

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

credit entries in form of share premium, loans were received from shell companies who are part of financial manoeuvring to legitimise illicit money and evade taxes and lack of genuineness in actual operations of shell companies. 21. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) has deleted the addition by superficially assessing the genuineness

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

credit entries in form of share premium, loans were received from shell companies who are part of financial manoeuvring to legitimise illicit money and evade taxes and lack of genuineness in actual operations of shell companies. 21. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) has deleted the addition by superficially assessing the genuineness

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER , NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

credit entries in form of share premium, loans were received from shell companies who are part of financial manoeuvring to legitimise illicit money and evade taxes and lack of genuineness in actual operations of shell companies. 21. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) has deleted the addition by superficially assessing the genuineness

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

credited in the books of an assessee\nmaintained for any previous year. and the assessee offers no\nexplanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation\noffered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer,\nsatisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income-tax as the\nincome of the assessee of that previous year

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

cash deposits in their bank accounts as\nunexplained investments of those creditors under section 69.\nFurther, we may point out that section 68 under which the addition has\nbeen made by the Assessing Officer reads as under:\n\"68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee\nmaintained for any previous year. and the assessee offers

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

cash deposits in their bank accounts as\nunexplained investments of those creditors under section 69.\nFurther, we may point out that section 68 under which the addition has\nbeen made by the Assessing Officer reads as under:\n\"68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee\nmaintained for any previous year. and the assessee offers