DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

bogus purchases claimed by the assessee\ncompany were disallowed and brought to tax.\n14. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of Sri B Kishore Kumar Vs DCIT (2015) 62\nTaxmann.com215/234 Taxmann 771, where in it was held that even a sworn\nstatement shall also constitute incriminating material

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

losses of Rs.48,120/- and Rs.295/- respectively for the A.Ys 1984-85 and 1985-86 respectively. The assessments for the A.Ys 1984-85 and 1985-86 were completed u/s 143(3) and 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as ‘Act’) vide order dated 12.04.1985 and 08.08.1986 respectively. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessments

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

losses of Rs.48,120/- and Rs.295/- respectively for the A.Ys 1984-85 and 1985-86 respectively. The assessments for the A.Ys 1984-85 and 1985-86 were completed u/s 143(3) and 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as ‘Act’) vide order dated 12.04.1985 and 08.08.1986 respectively. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessments

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

bogus purchases claimed by the assessee\ncompany were disallowed and brought to tax.\n14. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of Sri B Kishore Kumar Vs DCIT (2015) 62\nTaxmann.com215/234 Taxmann 771, where in it was held that even a sworn\nstatement shall also constitute incriminating material

GVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

bogus purchases claimed by the assessee\ncompany were disallowed and brought to tax.\n14. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of Sri B Kishore Kumar Vs DCIT (2015) 62\nTaxmann.com215/234 Taxmann 771, where in it was held that even a sworn\nstatement shall also constitute incriminating material

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GVA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DHAMTARI

bogus purchases claimed by the assessee\ncompany were disallowed and brought to tax.\n14. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of Sri B Kishore Kumar Vs DCIT (2015) 62\nTaxmann.com215/234 Taxmann 771, where in it was held that even a sworn\nstatement shall also constitute incriminating material

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

purchase of bogus plant and machinery was utilized but the same has been reintroduced into the business of the assessee company and hence the funds are utilized for the purpose of business and therefore, the interest payment cannot be disallowed. The Ld. AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and thereafter proceeded to disallow

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

purchase of bogus plant and machinery was utilized but the same has been reintroduced into the business of the assessee company and hence the funds are utilized for the purpose of business and therefore, the interest payment cannot be disallowed. The Ld. AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and thereafter proceeded to disallow

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

purchase of bogus plant and machinery was utilized but the same has been reintroduced into the business of the assessee company and hence the funds are utilized for the purpose of business and therefore, the interest payment cannot be disallowed. The Ld. AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and thereafter proceeded to disallow

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

purchase of bogus plant and machinery was utilized but the same has been reintroduced into the business of the assessee company and hence the funds are utilized for the purpose of business and therefore, the interest payment cannot be disallowed. The Ld. AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and thereafter proceeded to disallow

MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

purchase of bogus plant and machinery was utilized but the same has been reintroduced into the business of the assessee company and hence the funds are utilized for the purpose of business and therefore, the interest payment cannot be disallowed. The Ld. AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and thereafter proceeded to disallow

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

purchase transactions, raised serious doubts regarding the authenticity of the subject loan transaction in question. Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. 20. Considering the totality of the facts involved in the present case before us, we are of the firm conviction that the CIT(A) ought not to have summarily accepted the claim of the assessee company that it had raised

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

purchase transactions, raised serious doubts regarding the authenticity of the subject loan transaction in question. Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. 20. Considering the totality of the facts involved in the present case before us, we are of the firm conviction that the CIT(A) ought not to have summarily accepted the claim of the assessee company that it had raised

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

purchase transactions, raised serious doubts regarding the authenticity of the subject loan transaction in question. Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. 20. Considering the totality of the facts involved in the present case before us, we are of the firm conviction that the CIT(A) ought not to have summarily accepted the claim of the assessee company that it had raised

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

purchase transactions, raised serious doubts regarding the authenticity of the subject loan transaction in question. Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. 20. Considering the totality of the facts involved in the present case before us, we are of the firm conviction that the CIT(A) ought not to have summarily accepted the claim of the assessee company that it had raised

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA vs. VEDMUTHA ELECTRICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us:

purchase transactions, raised serious doubts regarding the authenticity of the subject loan transaction in question. Vedumutha Electricals India Private Limited. 20. Considering the totality of the facts involved in the present case before us, we are of the firm conviction that the CIT(A) ought not to have summarily accepted the claim of the assessee company that it had raised

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT. LTD., GUNTUR

bogus purchases thereby confirmed the deletion of balance of\nRs.18,44,787/-. The Ld. CIT(A), thus partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.\n11.\nOn being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), revenue is in appeal\nbefore us by raising following grounds of appeal: .\n\"1.\nThe order of the Ld.ClT(A) is erroneous both

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. VENKATRAMA POULTRIES PVT LTD, GUNTUR

bogus purchases thereby confirmed the deletion of balance of\nRs.18,44,787/-. The Ld. CIT(A), thus partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.\n11. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), revenue is in appeal\nbefore us by raising following grounds of appeal: .\n\"1.\nThe order of the Ld.ClT(A) is erroneous both