M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLWER,VIDISHA vs. THE ACIT- II, VIDISHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessees in

Bench: Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2016-17 M/S. Alankar Jewellers Acit-Ii Nikasha Road, Vidisha Bhopal बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D It(Ss)A No.205/Ind/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 Acit-Ii M/S. Alankar Jewellers Bhopal Nikasha Road, Vidisha बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Respondent By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

addition of 10987 gms of gold jewellery from the quantity of stock found (b) Bills of purchase of jewellery pending on the date of search (5685.92 grams) The appellant during the course of search as well as before the AO has stated that bills of various purchase of gold and diamond jewellery are pending, however, material was received prior

THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS certificate and the recipient Shri Rakesh Joshi is also assessed to tax and filed the return of income showing the business income. Therefore, the addition

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS certificate and the recipient Shri Rakesh Joshi is also assessed to tax and filed the return of income showing the business income. Therefore, the addition

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS certificate and the recipient Shri Rakesh Joshi is also assessed to tax and filed the return of income showing the business income. Therefore, the addition

JCIT(OSD),-2(1),INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

addition of Rs.20,27,440/-. The learned Assessing Officer has totally lost sight of the fact that the Silver Bar is of 30 Kg. Thus, the estimate has been made 30 times more on the basis of market information which is totally unrealistic, unjustified and bad in law. The appellant has sold 3972.263 Kgm of Silver Bars in different denominations

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

addition of Rs.20,27,440/-. The learned Assessing Officer has totally lost sight of the fact that the Silver Bar is of 30 Kg. Thus, the estimate has been made 30 times more on the basis of market information which is totally unrealistic, unjustified and bad in law. The appellant has sold 3972.263 Kgm of Silver Bars in different denominations

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

addition of Rs.20,27,440/-. The learned Assessing Officer has totally lost sight of the fact that the Silver Bar is of 30 Kg. Thus, the estimate has been made 30 times more on the basis of market information which is totally unrealistic, unjustified and bad in law. The appellant has sold 3972.263 Kgm of Silver Bars in different denominations

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

addition of Rs.60,03,055 [: on account of difference of interest received between income and expenditure account and 26AS. The appellant's submissions in this regard are reproduced as below "That in respect of mismatch in interest income as per 26AS statement and in the books of accounts, it is submitted that the as per 26AS statement downloaded

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

addition of Rs.60,03,055 [: on account of difference of interest received between income and expenditure account and 26AS. The appellant's submissions in this regard are reproduced as below "That in respect of mismatch in interest income as per 26AS statement and in the books of accounts, it is submitted that the as per 26AS statement downloaded

THE ACIT CENTRAL-3, INDORE vs. JARNALBEER SINGH BHATIA, KHANDWA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.19 To 23/Ind/2023 & Ita No.226/Ind/2023 Ays : 2013-14 To 2018-19 Jarnalbeer Singh Bhatia, Dcit/Acit, बनाम/ Bhatia Transport (Central)-3, Vs. Services, Indore. Old Indore Lines, Pandhana Road, Khandwa (Pan: Aixpb4565C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Income-tax Act, 1961, for non-deduction of TDS on freight expenses by assessee, ignoring that :- a) The assessee was liable to deduct TDS on such expenses and has failed to do so? b) Without prejudice to the above, additional

JARNALBEER SINGH BHATIA,KHANDWA vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL-3, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.19 To 23/Ind/2023 & Ita No.226/Ind/2023 Ays : 2013-14 To 2018-19 Jarnalbeer Singh Bhatia, Dcit/Acit, बनाम/ Bhatia Transport (Central)-3, Vs. Services, Indore. Old Indore Lines, Pandhana Road, Khandwa (Pan: Aixpb4565C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Income-tax Act, 1961, for non-deduction of TDS on freight expenses by assessee, ignoring that :- a) The assessee was liable to deduct TDS on such expenses and has failed to do so? b) Without prejudice to the above, additional

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

TDS. Order. Accounts & The lender companies Income- have duly incorporated Tax such income in their Returns of Profit & Loss Accounts lender and as also in their companies Returns of Income. are furnished along with other documenta ry M/sGreat Galleon Ventures ltd. IT(SS)A No.114, to 116 /Ind/2020 & ITANo.67 to 70/Ind/2021 evidences at page

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

TDS. Order. Accounts & The lender companies Income- have duly incorporated Tax such income in their Returns of Profit & Loss Accounts lender and as also in their companies Returns of Income. are furnished along with other documenta ry M/sGreat Galleon Ventures ltd. IT(SS)A No.114, to 116 /Ind/2020 & ITANo.67 to 70/Ind/2021 evidences at page

SHRI PRABHAT SOJATIA,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

additional ground in any case. d. Interest Income: - Interest income, Rs. 9,31,984, which was accrued and subjected to TDS

SHRI SUNIL SOJATIA,INDORE vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE -2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

additional ground in any case. d. Interest Income: - Interest income, Rs. 9,31,984, which was accrued and subjected to TDS

SHRI SURENDRA SINGH BHATIA,INDORE vs. THE JCIT-3, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

additional undisclosed income of Rs.9,00,00,000/- on my behalf for the assessment year under consideration. Shri G.S. Bhatia, on my behalf, had admitted such undisclosed income in respect of my proprietorship business concern namely M/s. Associated Transport Company. 7. That, Shri G.S. Bhatia, on my behalf, while giving reply to the question No. 15 of the statement recorded

THE ACIT, 4(1), INDORE vs. SHRI SANJAY LUNAWAT, INDORE

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2010-11

income in full i.e. Rs. 8,14,000/-. Accordingly, ground no.5 raised in the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas ground no.2 raised in the assessee’s Cross-objection is allowed. 30. Ground No.6 raised in the appeal of the Revenue is with regard to deletion of addition of Rs.18,99,796/- made by the Assessing Officer on account

JHABUA DHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT, RATLAM, RATLAM

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2008-09 Jhabua Dhar Kshetriya Acit/Dcit, Gramin Bank, Ratlam 204, C-21, Business Park, बनाम/ Opp. Hotel Radisson Blu, Mr-10, Vs. Indore

addition of Rs. 3,20,000/- on account of disallowance out of audit fee provision. The AO made the disallowance on the ground that the TDS has not been paid. The appellant during the course of appellate proceedings submitted that he has paid the TDS before filing of the return of income