YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.866 & 867/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.868 & 869/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.881 & 882/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 3, Aurangabad …. Vs. Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Aurangabad-431001 Pan: Aaacy1238P

153A of the Act after search was carried out at his business / residential premises. Consequent thereto, assessment proceedings were ITA Nos.866 to 869/PUN/2015 completed in the hands of assessee and estimated addition was made of ₹ 8 lakhs on account of inflated expenses relating to assessment year 2005-06. Similar addition has been made in all the other years also, which

YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.866 & 867/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.868 & 869/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.881 & 882/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 3, Aurangabad …. Vs. Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Aurangabad-431001 Pan: Aaacy1238P

153A of the Act after search was carried out at his business / residential premises. Consequent thereto, assessment proceedings were ITA Nos.866 to 869/PUN/2015 completed in the hands of assessee and estimated addition was made of ₹ 8 lakhs on account of inflated expenses relating to assessment year 2005-06. Similar addition has been made in all the other years also, which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.866 & 867/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.868 & 869/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.881 & 882/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 3, Aurangabad …. Vs. Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Aurangabad-431001 Pan: Aaacy1238P

153A of the Act after search was carried out at his business / residential premises. Consequent thereto, assessment proceedings were ITA Nos.866 to 869/PUN/2015 completed in the hands of assessee and estimated addition was made of ₹ 8 lakhs on account of inflated expenses relating to assessment year 2005-06. Similar addition has been made in all the other years also, which

YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.866 & 867/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.868 & 869/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.881 & 882/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 3, Aurangabad …. Vs. Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Aurangabad-431001 Pan: Aaacy1238P

153A of the Act after search was carried out at his business / residential premises. Consequent thereto, assessment proceedings were ITA Nos.866 to 869/PUN/2015 completed in the hands of assessee and estimated addition was made of ₹ 8 lakhs on account of inflated expenses relating to assessment year 2005-06. Similar addition has been made in all the other years also, which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.866 & 867/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.868 & 869/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Aurangabad-431001 …. Pan: Aaacy1238P Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Aurangabad आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.881 & 882/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 3, Aurangabad …. Vs. Yog Industries Ltd., 10, Shriniketan Colony, Jalna Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Aurangabad-431001 Pan: Aaacy1238P

153A of the Act after search was carried out at his business / residential premises. Consequent thereto, assessment proceedings were ITA Nos.866 to 869/PUN/2015 completed in the hands of assessee and estimated addition was made of ₹ 8 lakhs on account of inflated expenses relating to assessment year 2005-06. Similar addition has been made in all the other years also, which

AGARWAL GROUP CORPORATE HOLDING P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1666/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Brijendra Nath Agarwal, Mzsk & Associates, Chartered Accountants Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Near Rto, Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aawpa9005D Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Circle 2(1), Pune

1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions & scheme of the Act it be held that framing of assessment under section 147 of the Act after issue of notice under section 153A is bad in law and invalid. It be held that the reassessment proceedings got abated on issue of notice under section 153A

BRIJENDRA NATH AGARWAL,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1666/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Brijendra Nath Agarwal, Mzsk & Associates, Chartered Accountants Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Near Rto, Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aawpa9005D Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Circle 2(1), Pune

1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions & scheme of the Act it be held that framing of assessment under section 147 of the Act after issue of notice under section 153A is bad in law and invalid. It be held that the reassessment proceedings got abated on issue of notice under section 153A

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

CHANDUKAKA SARAF AND SONS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , (CENTRAL),, PUNE

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

1] The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and thereby erred in setting aside the said asst. order for verification of the following issues - a. Genuineness of total URD purchase and determine the quantum of such purchase which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No 134/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kolhapur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur. Pin-416 001 Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent

153A assessment proceedings and the fact that purchases from Manvir Metal were not included in the list of purchases offered as additional income ‘to buy peace of mind’. The CIT(A) further observed that it was incumbent on the Assessing Officer to make proper enquiries regarding purchases 6 A.Y. 2006-07 from Manvir Metals and confront the assessee with

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

bogus\ncompanies?\nAns: The accommodation entries by way of unsecured loans were taken to\npurchase properties. I did not have the amounts in the bank accounts but\nhad the cash. Therefore to purchase the properties, I had to do this\nexercise.\n6\nITA No.1178/PUN/2023\nITA No.2017/PUN/2024\nThe return of income for AY 2011-12 filed on 29/09/2011 by the assessee

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

bogus\ncompanies?\nAns: The accommodation entries by way of unsecured loans were taken to\npurchase properties. I did not have the amounts in the bank accounts but\nhad the cash. Therefore to purchase the properties, I had to do this\nexercise.\n6\nITA No.1178/PUN/2023\nITA No.2017/PUN/2024\nThe return of income for AY 2011-12 filed on 29/09/2011 by the assessee

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

Bogus purchases’. 8. in confirming disallowance of rent paid of Rs.31,44,000/- for bungalow located at 70, Koregaon Park, Pune taken on lease (belonging to M/s. Poonawalla Finvest & Agro Pvt. Ltd., ZSP Group Company) for office of Director of appellant company and depreciation of Rs.12,97,701/- on the assets placed there at 9. a. not considering the ‘cost