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

ab-initio. (3) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post- search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without

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

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

ab-initio. (3) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post- search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without

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

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

ab-initio. (3) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post- search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without

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

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

ab-initio. (3) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post- search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without

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

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

ab-initio. (3) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post- search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

2(1), ADIT (Inv.), Unit – II. We are unable to understand what are we supposed to make out of these two documents? Why are they being produced before this Tribunal in such a dramatic manner, especially when they are not even remotely related to the issue of provisions of section 153D application of mind by the Approving Authority. This

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

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

2(1), ADIT (Inv.), Unit – II. We are unable to understand what are we supposed to make out of these two documents? Why are they being produced before this Tribunal in such a dramatic manner, especially when they are not even remotely related to the issue of provisions of section 153D application of mind by the Approving Authority. This

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

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

2(1), ADIT (Inv.), Unit – II. We are unable to understand what are we supposed to make out of these two documents? Why are they being produced before this Tribunal in such a dramatic manner, especially when they are not even remotely related to the issue of provisions of section 153D application of mind by the Approving Authority. This

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

2(1), ADIT (Inv.), Unit – II. We are unable to understand what are we supposed to make out of these two documents? Why are they being produced before this Tribunal in such a dramatic manner, especially when they are not even remotely related to the issue of provisions of section 153D application of mind by the Approving Authority. This

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

2(1), ADIT (Inv.), Unit – II. We are\nunable to understand what are we supposed to make out of these two\ndocuments? Why are they being produced before this Tribunal in such a\ndramatic manner, especially when they are not even remotely related to\nthe issue of provisions of section 153D application of mind by the\nApproving Authority. This

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

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

ab-initio. (3) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post- search material or information available with the AO which can be related to 7 Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain ITA no.53, to 59/Nag./2024 the evidence found, it does

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

2(1), ADIT (Inv.), Unit – II. We are\nunable to understand what are we supposed to make out of these two\ndocuments? Why are they being produced before this Tribunal in such a\ndramatic manner, especially when they are not even remotely related to\nthe issue of provisions of section 153D application of mind by the\nApproving Authority. This