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

section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit and also disallowed ₹14,182 towards penal expenses. 3. Aggrieved the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), where the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) sustained the addition of ₹2,00,00,000. 4. Dissatisfied with the order

GOLDEN GOENKA COMMERCE PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2(1),, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.11/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Golden Goenka Commerce Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Rajgaj Traders Pvt. Ltd.)............................……….……Appellant 25A, S.P Mukherjee Road, 4Th Floor, Bhawanipore, Kol-25, [Pan: Aabcr7503F] Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Jamshedpur..…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kumar Pranab, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 4, 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 Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Cit(A)”], Dated 21.12.2018, Arising Out Of Assessment Framed Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011–12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, The Sum & Substance Of Which Is That The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of ₹4,73,00,000 Made By The Assessing Officer (“Ao”) Under Section 68 Of The Act Towards Share Capital & Share Premium, Ignoring The Documentary Evidences Placed On Record & Without Conducting Any Independent Enquiry. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011–12 Declaring Total Income Of ₹16,67,088. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened

68 of the Act towards share capital and share premium, ignoring the documentary evidences placed on record, and without conducting any independent enquiry. 3. Brief Facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011–12 declaring total income of ₹16,67,088. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened

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

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

90 taxmann.com 480 (Mad) that no grievance is caused to the Revenue so as to prefer its appeal before the tribunal when the Assessing Officer’s remand report itself accepts the taxpayer’s explanation on facts. 5. We also proceed further and notice that once the Assessing Officer has allowed the assessee’s corresponding material purchases claim in the revenue

SANJEEV SABLOK,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WD-1(4), JSR

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.147/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Sanjeev Sablok, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), 4, I.C.Road, Circuit House Area Jamshedpur Bistupur, Jamshedpur-831001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Adkps 4050 M (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri M.K.Choudhary, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.Cit(Dr)

Section 68 of the 9 Act. We notice from the bank statements produced at page 19 and 20 of the paper book that there are opening balance of Rs.7,35,638/- & Rs.6,93,559/- respectively in both the bank statements and from the bank statements on 11.05.2009 Rs.4,95,000/-, Rs.4,95,000/- has been transferred to Sablok & Associates

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RANCHI vs. SHRI KAMAL BHUSHAN, RANCHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue and the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] I.T.(Ss)A. No. 1/Ran/2021 I.T.(Ss)A. No. 5/Ran/2019

section 68 which has been cross checked with the details submitted in the paper book and as such. It is also observed that the assessing officer at time of assessment has failed to look into the submissions of the appellant and for that matter give any categorical finding for making the addition as from the order of assessment

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

90,47,000/- 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

90,47,000/-\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

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

SRI AJAY KUMAR KHATORE,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

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

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalea.Y. : 2012-2013 Sri Ajay Kumar Khatore, Vs Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi North Market Road, Upper Bazaar, Ranchi-834001 Pan No. : Aaacb 7488 C Respondent (Appellant) .

68,000/- from Khatore Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., where the assessee was a director having 50% share holding, to be deemed dividend within the meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The AO disallowed 1% of the expenditure on repairs & maintenance under the head operating expenses 3 thereby making an addition of Rs.10,464/- and assessed total income

DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,\n52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n24\nM/s Central Coal Fields

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

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16\nCSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,\n52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n24\nM/s Central Coal Fields Ltd.\n51.\nThe

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

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,\n52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n51. The first issue is in regard

DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,\n52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n51. The first issue is in regard

CCL,RNCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1 , RANCHI

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,\n52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n51. The first issue is in regard

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

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,\n52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n51. The first issue is in regard

CCL,RANCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1, RANCHI

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000\n4,80,45,00,000\n3,57,84,00,000\n2,52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,326\n51. The first issue is in regard to Tax Free Bond u/s.14A

CCL,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000 4,80,45,00,000 3,57,84,00,000 2,52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,326\n51. The first issue is in regard to Tax Free Bond u/s.14A

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

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000\n4,80,45,00,000\n3,57,84,00,000\n2,52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,326\n51. The first issue is in regard to Tax Free Bond u/s.14A

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

90,00,000\n69,52,00,000\n16 CSR Expenses\nTotal Rs.\n2,31,97,00,000\n4,80,45,00,000\n3,57,84,00,000\n2,52,68,00,000\n1,12,19,00,000\nGrand total of Disputes Rs.\n24,95,15,79,3\n9,326\n51. The first issue is in regard to Tax Free Bond