KROSS LIMITED,ADITYAPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR

Accordingly, ITA No. 98/RAN/2025 is allowed

Bench: the CIT(A) where appeal was dismissed on wrong facts.4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

47, Circuit House Area, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand-831001 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Amit Agarwal, AR Department represented by : Khubchand T.Pandya, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 07.11.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 20.11.2025 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both these appeals, ITA Nos. 97 & 98/RAN/2025, are filed by the assessee against the separate

KROSS LIMITED,ADITYAPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR

Accordingly, ITA No. 98/RAN/2025 is allowed

Bench: the CIT(A) where appeal was dismissed on wrong facts.4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

47, Circuit House Area, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand-831001 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Amit Agarwal, AR Department represented by : Khubchand T.Pandya, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 07.11.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 20.11.2025 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both these appeals, ITA Nos. 97 & 98/RAN/2025, are filed by the assessee against the separate

DCIT, HAZARIBAGH vs. SRI RAJENDRA LAL, HAZARIBAGH

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Cross Objection No.05/Ran/2018 A.Y. : 2009-2010 Shri Rajendra Lal, Vs Acit, Circle-2, Prop: M/S Alankar Jewellers Hazaribag Malviya Marg, Hazaribag Pan No. : Aaqpl 6547 B Respondent (Appellant) . & A.Y. : 2009-2010 Acit, Circle-2, Hazaribag Vs Shri Rajendra Lal, Prop: M/S Alankar Jewellers Malviya Marg, Hazaribag Pan No. : Aaqpl 6547 B Respondent (Appellant) .

47,020/-. In this case a survey operation u/s.133A of the Act was conducted on 22.01.2009 at the business premises of M/s Alankar Jewellers situated at Malviya Marg, Hazaribag. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) were issued to the assessee. The AO completed the assessment making following additions and passed order u/s.143

KAUSHAL JAIN,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Kaushal Jain, I.T.O., Radheshyam Garage Lane, Old Ward 1(5), Vs. Commissioner Compound, Ranchi. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Afgpj 0706 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) on the ground that the assessee failed to explain the cash deposits of ₹ 52,16,169/-. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order has also given the basis on which the addition was made by providing a table in the assessment order in paragraph

DCIT,CIRCLE-1,RANCHI, RANCHI vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD, RANCHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Central Coalfields Ltd., D.C.I.T., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, Circle-1, Vs. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue D.C.I.T., Central Coalfield Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Central Revenue Building Vs. Ranchi. Annexee, 5A, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

47,000/- Expenditure (v) Mines Closure Expenses ₹ 22,72,13,000/- (vi) CMPDIL expenses ₹ 43,53,60,000/- (viii) IICM Charges ₹ 2,35,40,000/- Total Additions/Disallowances ₹ 97,77,17,000/- The penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were separately initiated with the issue of notice under Section 274 read with section

M/S. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.,,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue\nis dismissed

47,000/-\nExpenditure\n(v) Mines Closure Expenses\n* 22,72,13,000/-\n(vi) CMPDIL expenses\n*43,53,60,000/-\n(viii) IICM Charges\n* 2,35,40,000/-\nTotal Additions/Disallowances\n* 97,77,17,000/-\nThe penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were separately\ninitiated with the issue of notice under Section

JOKHIRAM DURGADUTT,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayjokhiram Durgadutt, D.C.I.T., 9, J.D. Corporate, Behind J.D. High Circle-1, Vs. Street, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 Ranchi. (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aabfj 2200 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

section 271 (1)(c)." 4. The contention of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeal ) that the assessee had claimed an unallowable standard deduction of Rs. 68,36,208/- is fully compensated by way of depreciation being allowed Rs. 2,31,19,350/-. So, the revenue is no way being put at loss or in other wards the assessee

JAI LAXMI TRADERS,DHANBAD vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE 1, DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Jai Laxmi Traders, Dcit/Acit, Office No. 423, 2Nd Floor City Centre, Circle-1, Vs. Luby Circular Road, Dhanbad-826001 Dhanbad. Pan No. Aalfj 7433 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

47,087/-, contrary to the actual audited figure of ₹2,10,52,253.69, is factually incorrect. It is a settled principle that without rejection or objecting the books of accounts, no addition can be made. In the absence of specific defects in the books, additions based solely on estimated profits ignoring the unique commercial and market conditions of each business

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

Section 263 of the Act dated 26/12/2022, set aside the order of Assessing Officer dated 24/09/2021 on the ground that the Assessing Officer did not make any enquiry or investigation to ascertain the nature, source and genuineness of ₹ 2,68,72,976/- and directed the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment on the issues discussed above because

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

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of\nthe Rules were applicable on the assessee and after giving a show\ncause computed the disallowance at Rs. 27,19,753/- comprising of\nRs. 9,11,753/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 17,32,000/- under Rule\n8D(2)(iii) of the Rules

CCL,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held

DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held

DCIT CIR-1 , RANCHI vs. M/S CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD, RANCHI

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held

ACIT CIR-1, JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S AUTOPROFILE LTD, JAMSHEDPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11

47, C.H. Area, C-33, 34 & 35, Phase IV, Jamshedpur Adityapur Industrial Area, Gamharia, Jamshedpur-832108 [PAN No.AABCA 3931 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri P.K. Mondal, JCIT-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 15-02-2019 घोषणा

DCIT CIRCLE-1 , RANCHI vs. CCL LTD , RANCHI

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure\nAllowability of (Welfare expenses of employees) - Assessee-\ncompany was engaged in business of coal mining It claimed\nexpenses incurred towards welfare of of its employees like canteen,\nhostels, etc. business expenditure Commissioner disallowed same\non ground that said expenditures had not been properly explained\nand that assessee

DCIT CIR-1,, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held

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

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of\nthe Rules were applicable on the assessee and after giving a show\ncause computed the disallowance at Rs. 27,19,753/- comprising of\nRs. 9,11,753/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 17,32,000/- under Rule\n8D(2)(iii) of the Rules

CCL,RANCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1, RANCHI

Section 14A of the\nAct was in existence and the some disallowances were called for. It was\nsubmitted that the disallowance should be proportionate to the investment\nmade.\n33. In rejoinder, Id. AR submitted that the bonds were on account of\nsecuritization of the debts. It was the submission that in the earlier years\nthe Id.CIT(A) has held

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

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of\nthe Rules were applicable on the assessee and after giving a show\ncause computed the disallowance at Rs. 27,19,753/- comprising of\nRs. 9,11,753/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 17,32,000/- under Rule\n8D(2)(iii) of the Rules