M/S ANJENEYA ISPAT LTD.,SARAIKELA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX, CIRCELE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.75/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Anjeneya Ispat Ltd.…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 29, Rain Basera, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Adityapur, Saraikela, Jharkhand- 831013. [Pan: Aagca1031N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur.….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Jamshedpur (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 25.09.2017 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019–20 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹62,64,116. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny. During The Relevant Previous Year, A Survey Operation Under Section 133A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Was Conducted At The Business Premises Of The Assessee On 16.02.2019. Subsequently, Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Appeared From Time To Time & Furnished Various Details & Documents As Called For. The Same Were Examined & Discussed By The Assessing Officer During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. During

Income-tax Officer [2023] 150 taxmann.com 120 (Chennai - Trib.)[21- 12-2022] wherein it has been held as under:- 7. Both the sides have been heard, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including paper book filed by the assessee. In this case, the Assessing Officer made addition

ACIT,CIRCLE-2(1), HAZARIBAG vs. SANJAY KUMAR UPADHYAY, HAZARIBAG

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and making the addition of Rs. 46,76,305/- u/s 68 of the Income

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

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

income of assessee. It was held that all the parties with regard to which the addition has been made, no new amount was found credited in its account during the year under consideration hence section 68

RAJESH BADRI PD. MODI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

HARISH KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

PARAS KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SANGITA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SANTOSH KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SAMIR KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SUNILA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C. , DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

MANJU DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

KANTA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

AAKRITI SARAWGI,,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

additions. However, the Assessing Officer treated the income disclosed by the assessee as business income to such extent as related to the disclosure made u/s. 132(4) of the Act as unexplained investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

KAMESHWAR ALLOYS AND STEELS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.49/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kameshwar Alloys & Steels Pvt. Ltd….…............................……….……Appellant 128/3, Hazra Road, Bhawanipur, Kol-700026.. [Pan: Aadck6558K] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Md. Shadab Ahmed, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 05.02.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company, Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration. The Case Was Originally Selected For Scrutiny On The Issue Of Share Capital & Share Premium Received During The Year. The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Ex Parte Under Section 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Ground Of Alleged Non-Compliance & Made An Addition Of ₹2,00,00,000 Being Share Capital & Share Premium Received From Various Companies, Treating The Same As Unexplained Under Section 68 Of The Act. Subsequently, A Search & Seizure Operation Under

Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground of alleged non-compliance, and made an addition of ₹2,00,00,000 being share capital and share premium received from various companies, treating the same as unexplained under section 68

M/S ANJENEYE ISPAT LTD.,SARAIKELA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.74/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Anjeneya Ispat Ltd.…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 29, Rain Basera, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Adityapur, Saraikela, Jharkhand – 831013. [Pan: Aagca1031N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur……....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Jamshedpur (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 21.08.2018 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Manufacturing Of Pig Iron. It Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹1,41,05,250, Which Was Processed Under Section 143(1). During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noticed That The Assessee Had Received Share Capital & Share Premium Aggregating To ₹3,00,00,000 During The Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Issued Notices Under Sections 142(1) & 148 Requiring The Assessee To Furnish Complete Details Of The Share Applicants, Including Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions. In Response, The Assessee Furnished Complete Details In Respect Of The Share Capital/Share Premium Received From The Following Parties:

addition under section 68 could be made on account of share premium received by assessee iv. Principal Commissioner of Income

ADHUNIK AKSHAT UDYOG PVT. LTD.,,DUMKA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), DEOGHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.163/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Adhunik Akshat Udyog Pvt. Ltd……………............................……….……Appellant Industrial Area, Babupur, Muffasil Thana Dumka, Jharkhand – 814101. [Pan: Aabca4896Q] Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Deoghar…...…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sushil Pransukha, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Dated 11.03.2025 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2012–13 Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,57,551. The Case Was Reopened Under Section 147 On The Ground That The Assessee Had Raised Share Capital & Share Premium From Certain Entities, Whose Financial Capacity & Genuineness Of Investment Remained Unexplained. During Assessment, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Had Introduced Share Capital Of ₹37,50,000 From The Following Four Private Limited Companies:

income of ₹2,57,551. The case was reopened under section 147 on the ground that the assessee had raised share capital and share premium from certain entities, whose financial capacity and genuineness of investment remained unexplained. During assessment, the AO noted that the assessee had introduced share capital of ₹37,50,000 from the following four private limited companies

ACIT, CC, DHANBAD, DHANBAD vs. KUMBH NATH SINGH, DHANBAD

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.90 To 94/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-2009 To 2012-2013) Shri Kumbh Nath Singh, Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Bcpps 1598 K & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.268 & 269/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 & 2012-2013) Acit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Vs Shri Kumbh Nath Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Bcpps 1598 K & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.95 To 99/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-2009 To 2012-2013) Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Shri Bharat Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Bcpps 1599 J & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.100 To 106/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2006-2007 To 2012-2013) Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Shri Lal Bahadur Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aydps 0747 D & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.265 To 267/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Acit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Vs Shri Lal Bahadur Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aydps 0747 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate & Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None(Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax. The letter simply grants an approval. In other words, even the bare minimum requirement of the approving authority having to indicate what the thought process involved was is missing in the aforementioned approval order. While elaborate reasons need not be given, there has to be some indication that the approving authority has examined the draft

LAL BAHADUR SINGH,DHANBAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.90 To 94/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-2009 To 2012-2013) Shri Kumbh Nath Singh, Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Bcpps 1598 K & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.268 & 269/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 & 2012-2013) Acit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Vs Shri Kumbh Nath Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Bcpps 1598 K & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.95 To 99/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-2009 To 2012-2013) Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Shri Bharat Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Bcpps 1599 J & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.100 To 106/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2006-2007 To 2012-2013) Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Shri Lal Bahadur Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aydps 0747 D & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.265 To 267/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Acit, Central Circle, Dhanbad Vs Shri Lal Bahadur Singh, Simla Bahal Cilliery, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aydps 0747 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate & Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None(Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax. The letter simply grants an approval. In other words, even the bare minimum requirement of the approving authority having to indicate what the thought process involved was is missing in the aforementioned approval order. While elaborate reasons need not be given, there has to be some indication that the approving authority has examined the draft