BADRINATH SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,ADITYAPUR, WEST SINGHBHUM vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE 1 JSR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

purchase of\ngoods.\nWrongful disallowance of commission expense\n1.5 For ground 4:That the order passed by the Ld. AO has erred\nin law by making an addition of INR 3,00,000/- with respect to\ncommission expenses incurred by the assessee.\n1.5.1 That the Ld. AO disallowed commission payment of Rs 3,00,000\nobserving that same is doubtful

REENA KHETAN,KODERMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KODERMA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: S/ S/Hri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year : 2012-13 Reena Khetan, M/S. Anand Reena Khetan, M/S. Anand Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - Income Tax Officer, Ward Vihar, Ranchi Patna Road, Vihar, Ranchi Patna Road, 1(5)Koderma Jhumritelaiya, Jhumritelaiya, Koderma, Koderma, Jharkhand Pan/Gir No. .Adlpk 5070 G (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Devesh Poddar, Adv Revenue By : Shri Khubchand T Pandya, Revenue By Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/08/202 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/08/2 2025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Cit(A), Nfac, Nfac, Delhi Delhi Dated Dated 28.8.2023 In In Appeal Appeal No.Cit(A) No.Cit(A) Hazaribag/10153/2019 Hazaribag/10153/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 13. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar, Shri Devesh Poddar, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Ed For The Assessee. Shri Khubchand T Pandya, Khubchand T Pandya, Ld Sr Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

purchase of shares has not been disputed or doubted however the sale has been disputed in the current year to be bogus and in the nature of accommodation entries. The Hon'ble High Court P a g e 4 | 6 Assessment Year : 2012-13 of has dealt with the identical issue in the above referred decision. We, therefore, following

SHAH BROTHERS,CHAIBASA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshah Brothers, A.C.I.T., Thana Lane, Chaibasa-833201 Central Circle-1, Vs. (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aazfs 7498 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

deducted at source: d) Particulars of the recipient were duly furnished; We are, as such, of the opinion that the views expressed by the learned Tribunal are unexceptionable. We, therefore refuse to admit the appeal. The appeal is thus dismissed.” 4. Similar view was taken by the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nangalia Fabrics

MOTOREX FINANCE PVT LTD ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaymotorex Finance Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O., 1A, Grant Lane, Kolkata-700012 (West Ward 4(1), Vs. Bengal). Kolkata. Pan No. Aaccm 1042 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

bogus transactions and the interest income was added as an unexplained income of the assessee. The ld. AR drew our attention to page No. 14 of the paper book which is a copy of the balance sheet and the P&L account of the assessee. The ld. AR also drew our attention to page No.16 which was the details

KULDIP SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.180/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kuldip Singh…………………….……….……...................……….……Appellant The Avenue Vishnupuri Marg, Upper Burdwan Compound, Lalpur, Ranchi- 834001. [Pan: Agjps6921P] Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-1, Ranchi…...…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 10, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 06.03.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

purchased land measuring 0.67 acre for a consideration of ₹42,30,000, whereas the stamp duty valuation was ₹1,20,02,000, and the difference of ₹77,72,000 was treated as income. 3. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee raised specific legal grounds, challenging the validity of reopening under section 147, as well as grounds on merits. However