SHRIRAM MARKETING SERVICES,GIRIDIH vs. PCIT, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

TDS was made u/s 1941. Since the assessee did not file the return for the A.Y. 2013-14, the entire amount of payment received by it during such F.Y., which was Rs.2,68,72,976/-, may be treated as income escaped assessment." From the perusal of Para 2 of the Assessment order, it can be seen based on the information

RAJENDRA KUMAR SAHI,RANCHI vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.148/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Rajendra Kumar Sahi………….……………............................……….……Appellant Hulhundu, Hatia, Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834003. [Pan: Agkps0098L] Vs. Cit(Appeal), Jharkhand….....…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 29, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Dated 07.08.2024 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2022–23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2022–23 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹4,96,520. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny As The Assessee Had Disclosed Comparatively Low Income Against Receipts On Which Tcs Had Been Deducted. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Noted A Possibility That The Assessee Had Shown Low Income In Order To Reduce Taxable Profits. It Was Also Observed That The Assessee Had Claimed Significantly Higher Tds In The Revised Itr. Therefore, The Ao Intended To Verify The Genuineness Of The Additional Tds Claim & Whether The Corresponding Receipts Had Been Offered To Tax. Accordingly, Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act Were Issued To The Assessee. However, The Assessee Did Not Comply With The Notices. Consequently, The Ao

income in order to reduce taxable profits. It was also observed that the assessee had claimed significantly higher TDS in the revised ITR. Therefore, the AO intended to verify the genuineness of the additional

ITO, TDS, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHHINAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT PVT. LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-3, Patna [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] both dated 28/02/2022 and for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015- 16 and 2016-17 respectively. These appeals of the revenue are having common facts and grounds except variation in the amounts of addition deleted by the ld. CIT(A), therefore, with the consent of parties, both these appeals

ITO, TDS,, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHINNAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-3, Patna [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] both dated 28/02/2022 and for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015- 16 and 2016-17 respectively. These appeals of the revenue are having common facts and grounds except variation in the amounts of addition deleted by the ld. CIT(A), therefore, with the consent of parties, both these appeals

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

additions made for disallowance of contractual\npayment to L.B Singh & his brothers, drew our attention to the report of the\ninvestigation unit which was received by the Ld AO copy of which is\nreproduced as below:-\n28\nM/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.\n34\nGovernment of India\n(Confidential)\nOffice of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhanbad.\nAaykar Bhawan, Luby Circular

ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

additions made for disallowance of contractual\npayment to L.B Singh & his brothers, drew our attention to the report of the\ninvestigation unit which was received by the Ld AO copy of which is\nreproduced as below:-\nGovernment of India\n(Confidential)\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(34)\n32\n(33)\n(35\n(36)\n39\nGOVERNMENT OF INDIA\nDIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

Addition\n4,759,089.00\n7,537,966.00\nAdd-Gill from Brother\n78,750,000.00\nOther Investnent\n713,700.00\nCheque in Hand\n9,963,117.00\nAdd: Income During The Year\n293.124.00\nSecurity Deposit with BCCL\nShares in Companies (Unquoted)\nLand\n100,000.00\n16,024,576,00\nNet Profit\n55,995,236.00 175,397,897.00\nCash at Bank\nB.O.I

DCIT,CIRCLE-1, RANCHI vs. M/S VKS AKS AIPL, KHUNTI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

income with minor addition which works out to only 0.37% of the net profit. It is the contention of the AR that there is no justification for the AO to estimate the net profit anything higher than 0.37%, which is as per the scrutiny Assessment Order u/s 143(3) for A.Y. 2014-15, I find that lot of force

SANJAY CHAWLA,CHAIBASA vs. PR. CIT, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaysanjay Chawla, Pr.C.I.T., Sentola, Chaibasa-833201 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Vs. Pan No. Acmpc 6808 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

TDS & TCS provisions. 7. That as stated above, it is not a case where no enquiry or no application of mind has been done by the Ld AO. Apparently what can be opined is only that the Ld PCTT was not fully convinced with the enquiry and verification done by the Ld AO and as such, the powers vested

ACIT CIR-2(1), JSR vs. JUSCO LTD , JSR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

addition as partly sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly our decision in ground no. 3 in ITA NO. 11/Ran/2018 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. Consequently ground no. 2 is allowed. 13. Issue raised in ground no. 3 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) not granting TDS credit

JUSCO LTD ,JSR vs. DCIT CIR-2 , JSR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

addition as partly sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly our decision in ground no. 3 in ITA NO. 11/Ran/2018 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. Consequently ground no. 2 is allowed. 13. Issue raised in ground no. 3 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) not granting TDS credit

JAMSHEDPUR UTILITIES AND SERVICES COMPANY LTD,JSR vs. ACIT CIR-2, JSR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

addition as partly sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly our decision in ground no. 3 in ITA NO. 11/Ran/2018 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. Consequently ground no. 2 is allowed. 13. Issue raised in ground no. 3 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) not granting TDS credit

ACIT CIR-2(1), JSR vs. JUSCO LTD , JSR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

addition as partly sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly our decision in ground no. 3 in ITA NO. 11/Ran/2018 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. Consequently ground no. 2 is allowed. 13. Issue raised in ground no. 3 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) not granting TDS credit

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs. JT. CIT, TDS,, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The ACIT, TDS Circle, Dhanbad, therefore, submitted a proposal for initiation of penalty under the financial year under consideration. Accordingly, a penalty notice under Section 271C of the Act was issued to the assessee company on 28/02/2018 asking the assessee to furnish written submission within seven days of the receipt

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,,DHANBAD vs. JCIT, TDS CIRCLE,, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The ACIT, TDS Circle, Dhanbad, therefore, submitted a proposal for initiation of penalty under the financial year under consideration. Accordingly, a penalty notice under Section 271C of the Act was issued to the assessee company on 28/02/2018 asking the assessee to furnish written submission within seven days of the receipt

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs. JCIT TDS, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The ACIT, TDS Circle, Dhanbad, therefore, submitted a proposal for initiation of penalty under the financial year under consideration. Accordingly, a penalty notice under Section 271C of the Act was issued to the assessee company on 28/02/2018 asking the assessee to furnish written submission within seven days of the receipt

SHRI NAVNEET MODI,RANCHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.53/Ran/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Navneet Modi….…..…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant Modi House, Kanke Dam Side Road, Kanke, Ranchi-834008. [Pan: Actpm1511F] Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi.………………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 28, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.10.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

TDS certificate to the assessee at the time of filing of Income Tax Return for the assessment year under consideration. The ld. Assessing Officer rejected all the contentions made by the assessee on single line order that the contention of the assessee was not accepted and the amount is treated as income not disclosed and levied the impugned penalty. I.T.A

SRI KRISHNA NUTRITIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 261 to 263/Ran/2023 (Assessment Years-2014-15 to 2016-17) Sri Krishna Nutritions India Private A.C.I.T., Limited, Central Circle-2, Vs. Room No. 5, 1st Floor, 7/1A, Grant Ranchi. Lane, Kolkata-700012 (West Bengal) PAN No. AAOCS