ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI vs. SHRI SUMIT RAMSISARIA, RANCHI

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

133(6) were returned unserved or no reply was received. One M/S Auto Car, has replied and stated that no such transaction was conducted with the assessee "Sumit Ramsisaria" PAN AGSPR9835J, copy of letter is filed [page no.24]. On this basis Ld. A.O. observed that there is dearth of supporting evidences on record to verify the genuineness and correctness

BIJOY KUMAR AGARWAL,RANCHI vs. ACIT/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmaandshri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountantmember

section 133(6) were issued to Bombay Stock Exchange, National Stock Exchange, Concerned brokers. Despite the above, the AO treated the LTCG of ₹30,55,833 as bogus, holding that the transaction was part of a pre-arranged penny stock scheme, and added the same to the total income. 2. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred

SHRI BIRENDRA PRASAD,BOKARO vs. ITO WARD-3(1), BOKARO

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

133(6) for personal appearance of Sri Dilip Prasad Burnwal who expired on 22.11.2007. Further documentary evidence could not be produced since the donor had expired. Fact of gift was reflected in the Return of Income filed. Ld. A.O. while making­the assessment u/s 143(3)/147 had accepted the gift received from Sri Dilip Kumar Burnwal "Mausa" of the appellant

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

133(6) was conducted and it was found that M/s. Core Minerals denied having received any such “Incentive on Sale” from you. In view of this, your claim of Rs. 9,45,96,300/- stand disproved. Your are directed to explain as to why it should not be disallowed and added back to your income. (7) It is seen from