JAYDEV MAHADEV ARYA,LATUR vs. ITO WARD 1, LATUR, LATUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

cash deposits made in these accounts are subsequently transferred to bank accounts of shell entities. The funds are subsequently being remitted abroad by these shell entities for prima facie bogus imports etc. Accordingly, even as per the report of the Investigation Wing, Renukamata Society had roped in various individuals of meagre means to open bank accounts in their names

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 , LATUR vs. VIMAL JAYDEV ARYA, LATUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

cash deposits made in these accounts are subsequently transferred to bank accounts of shell entities. The funds are subsequently being remitted abroad by these shell entities for prima facie bogus imports etc. Accordingly, even as per the report of the Investigation Wing, Renukamata Society had roped in various individuals of meagre means to open bank accounts in their names

MANOJ DIWAKAR PATANE,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1) KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.437/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Manoj Diwakar Patane, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), 339/21/22/23, Vasant Kolhapur. Sahawas, Wing F-3, Shahupuri, Karveer- 416003. Pan : Aippp3853K Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.711/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Samita Manoj Patane, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Shop No.1 653/A, Kusum Kolhapur. Apartment, 2Nd Lane, Shahupuri- 416001. Pan : Amypp8375M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing 10.02.2025 : Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Appeals Filed By Two Difference Assessees Are Directed Against The Different Order Dated 16.01.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac (In The Case Of Manoj Diwakar Patane) & Order Dated 21.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Pune-11 (In The Case Of Smita Manoj Patane) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of Two Different Assessees, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.437/Pun/2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18 (In The Case Of Manoj Diwakar Patane) As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

deposited cash of Rs.1,90,00,000/- in his bank account With Karnataka Bank Ltd and Rs.80,00,000/- in the bank a/c of his wife Smita with Karnataka Bank Ltd and sent RTGS to Nav Maharashtra Chakan Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. against bogus sales bill issued by said company. The survey party also impounded the sales and purchase

SMITA MANOJ PATANE,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO 2(1) KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.437/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Manoj Diwakar Patane, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), 339/21/22/23, Vasant Kolhapur. Sahawas, Wing F-3, Shahupuri, Karveer- 416003. Pan : Aippp3853K Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.711/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Samita Manoj Patane, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Shop No.1 653/A, Kusum Kolhapur. Apartment, 2Nd Lane, Shahupuri- 416001. Pan : Amypp8375M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing 10.02.2025 : Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Appeals Filed By Two Difference Assessees Are Directed Against The Different Order Dated 16.01.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac (In The Case Of Manoj Diwakar Patane) & Order Dated 21.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Pune-11 (In The Case Of Smita Manoj Patane) For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of Two Different Assessees, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.437/Pun/2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18 (In The Case Of Manoj Diwakar Patane) As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

deposited cash of Rs.1,90,00,000/- in his bank account With Karnataka Bank Ltd and Rs.80,00,000/- in the bank a/c of his wife Smita with Karnataka Bank Ltd and sent RTGS to Nav Maharashtra Chakan Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. against bogus sales bill issued by said company. The survey party also impounded the sales and purchase

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SHRI MANOJ SURESH SHARMA,, DHULE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and the Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1645/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

deposition, the A.O. disallowed the entire purchases made by the assessee from the said supplier. This disallowance was deleted by the CIT(A) and Hon'ble ITAT deleted the disallowance. On further appeal by the Dept., Hon'ble Gujarat High Court noted that the payments towards the impugned purchases were through banking channel and there was no evidence that

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SMT. JAYSHREE SURESH SHARMA,, DHULE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1646 To 1648/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

deposition, the A.O. disallowed the entire purchases made by the assessee from the said supplier. This disallowance was deleted by the CIT(A) and Hon' ble ITAT deleted the disallowance. On further appeal by the Dept., Hon 'ble Gujarat High Court noted that the payments towards the impugned purchases were through banking channel and there was no evidence that

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SMT. JAYSHREE SURESH SHARMA,, DHULE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1646 To 1648/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 वष"

deposition, the A.O. disallowed the entire purchases made by the assessee from the said supplier. This disallowance was deleted by the CIT(A) and Hon' ble ITAT deleted the disallowance. On further appeal by the Dept., Hon 'ble Gujarat High Court noted that the payments towards the impugned purchases were through banking channel and there was no evidence that

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK vs. TAPARIA TOOLS LIMITED, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as per the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1337/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

bogus bills/fake invoices. b) Obtaining account payee cheques. c) Depositing cheque in the bank account of beneficiary. d) Withdrawing cash by beneficiary. e) Returning back of cash after adjustment of outgoings, if any. None of these ingredients were proved by the AO, in order to prove that the purchases

BHISE INTERNATIONAL AUTO INDUSTRIES,,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2913/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bhise International Auto Industries, Plot No.7, Bhise Bungalow, Bhadrapad, Near Ambad Police Station Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422010 …. Pan: Aaifb8245Q Vs.

cash payment. However, he showed inability to produce the parties since no other transaction had taken placed with them. The CIT(A) after deliberating upon the issue of bogus purchases, was of the view that it was not a case of bogus purchases but a case of inflated purchases. The Assessing Officer was directed to restrict the disallowance

INCOME TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. TRINITY STEEL PROFILES PVT. LTD,, NASHIK

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

deposited by the supplier and therefore, the Income Tax Dept. is not justified in raising additional tax liability on the assessee in respect of these purchases by adopting a contrary interpretation of the same statement to the effect that there has been no actual transfer of goods. 5. Without prejudice, the assessee submits that the addition made by estimating profit

M/S. THERMO ENGINEERS PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

cash and hence, in the absence of any contrary evidence, there was no reason to doubt the genuineness of the payments made to the said party. 4] The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that – a. The above supplier had evaded VAT and hence, it may have denied any actual sales before the Sales Tax Dept. solely to absolve

M/S. THERMO ENGINEERS PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

cash and hence, in the absence of any contrary evidence, there was no reason to doubt the genuineness of the payments made to the said party. 4] The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that – a. The above supplier had evaded VAT and hence, it may have denied any actual sales before the Sales Tax Dept. solely to absolve

SWAPNIL CHANDRABHAN KALWANE,,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, AURANGABAD

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1432/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri. Swapnil C. Kalwane, Gajgaon, Tq. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad .......अपीलाथी / Appellant Pan : Arrpk3148B

bogus. Further the surrounding circumstances do indicate that all is not well with the alleged claim of cash received against sale of agricultural produce. The appellant had also failed to prove with corroborative evidence that his family members had actually given him cash for making deposits in his bank account. There is neither any evidence for primary operations nor secondary

M/S. GOVINDAM METAL & ALLOYS P.LTD,,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, JALNA

In the result, appeal of the assesse in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 40/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Jalna. .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Govindam Metal & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.B-15, Addl. Midc Area, Jalna- 431 203. Pan : Aacct9215F ………प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 81/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Govindam Metal & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. C/O. Sandeep Narendra Agarwal, Bharat Nagar, Near Shivaji Statue, Jalna-431 203. Pan : Aacct9215F .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Jalna. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

deposited by cheque against the sales and withdrawn by self cheques in cash on the same date for returning to the purchaser by charging certain commission. In view of this situation, the assessee indulged into purchase of material unaccountedly in cash from undisclosed sources in contravention to the provisions of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER,, JALNA vs. M/S. GOVINDAM METAL & ALLOYS PVT. LTD,, JALNA

In the result, appeal of the assesse in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 40/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Jalna. .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Govindam Metal & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.B-15, Addl. Midc Area, Jalna- 431 203. Pan : Aacct9215F ………प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 81/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Govindam Metal & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. C/O. Sandeep Narendra Agarwal, Bharat Nagar, Near Shivaji Statue, Jalna-431 203. Pan : Aacct9215F .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Jalna. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

deposited by cheque against the sales and withdrawn by self cheques in cash on the same date for returning to the purchaser by charging certain commission. In view of this situation, the assessee indulged into purchase of material unaccountedly in cash from undisclosed sources in contravention to the provisions of section

ALOK MAHESHCHANDRA AGRAWAL,JALGAON vs. DCIT - 1, JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1736/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Alok Maheshchandra V The Dcit-1, Agarwal, S Jalgaon. Alok Agro Product 137, Bhawani Peth, Jalgaon – 425001. Pan: Afypa7187D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Dinar Daptary – Ca & Shri Sidhesh Mayekar – Ar Revenue By Dr. Shashank Ojha – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2024 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)[Nfac] For A.Y.2016- 17 Dated 18.06.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. In This Case, Assessment Order Has Been Passed U/Sec.143(3) R.W.S 263 Of The Act, On 30.03.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1 On Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As Learned Cit(A) Erred In Passing The Order U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Without Appreciating The Provisions Of Law, Statutory Schemes, Facts, Submissions, Documents & Case Laws. The Appellant Prays That The Entire Assessment Be Treated As Bad In Law.

bogus as they do not mention complete address and VAT registration number without considering the fact that the Appellant is a retailer and not all the customers would have VAT registration. The Appellant prays that the addition made u/s.68 of the Act on this account be deleted in toto. 2.7 The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition

BHADANES HITECH TECHNOLOGY COMPUTER PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

cash credit. In Sreelekha Banerjee V. CIT, the Supreme Court has held that if there is an entry in the account books of the assessee which shows the receipt of a sum, it is necessary for the assessee to establish, if asked what the source of that money is and to prove that it does not bear the nature

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. RAJAMUKHA STEEL AND ALLOYS LTD.,, JALNA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

deposited by the supplier in his bank account and subsequently the cheques were declared in the accounts of other hawaIa dealers, therefore, the entire transactions were held to be not genuine. Since 6 M/s. Worth Traders was named as a hawala dealer by VAT department therefore the AO held that purchases made from M/s, J.B.D. Enterprises were also not genuine