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

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, (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

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

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

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

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

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

ACIT-1(1), INDORE vs. KRITI NUTRIENTS LIMITED, INDORE

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

income.\nKriti Nutrients Ltd.\nITA No. 780/Ind/2024\nA.Y. 2021-22\nPage 28 of 107\nBasis above the Ld. DR also emphasised during the hearing that\nno details were provided for “Brokerage & Commission Paid”\n[ no ledger, no note on nature of services rendered, no PAN\ndetails, no TDS deductions etc.]. Similarly, no details provided\nfor “sales promotions expenses” [Rs.1

AL A S REAL ESTATE ANS DEVELOPERS P LTD,RATLAM vs. THE ITO -1 ,RATLAM, RATLAM

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Al A S Real Estate & Pr. Commissioner Of Developers Private Ltd., Income-Tax-1, बनाम/ 82, Nolaipura, Indore Vs. Ratlam (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Aakca 0026 H Assessee By Shri Rajesh Mehta, Ca & Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08.02.2024

TDS to Income-tax Department out of payments made to M/s AD Enterprises. 6. Clearly therefore, Ld. AR contended, the AO has made queries and the assessee has filed all details/documents to AO. These contemporary documents clearly show that it is not a case of “no enquiry” as alleged by Ld. PCIT. Ld. AR submitted that the PCIT has wrongly

RAISEN MARKETING P LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ADIT CPC , BGHOPAL

In the result, the present appeal is allowed in so far as it relates\nto adjudication of Ground No

income. Therefore, the addition was directed to be deleted.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(1)", "234B", "234C", "32(1)(ii)", "32(1)(iia)", "32(1)(i)", "115JB", "206CA", "194A", "14A" ], "issues": "Whether the addition made by the AO in the intimation u/s 143(1) was a double addition, and whether the denial of credit for TCS and TDS

M/S ROCKBED RENOVATORS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirockbed Renovators Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 7-A, Panjabi Bagh Raisen Road Bhopal Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacr7151G Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2024

addition is made and the returned income is accepted. This finding by AO is fully supported from various documents placed in the Paper-Book as discussed in foregoing paras of this order, which clearly show that the AO has issued multiple questionnaires u/s 142(1) and made repeat enquiries to examine the expenses claimed by assessee in general and payments

THEACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S KETI CONSTRUCTION LTD., INDORE

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit(Central)-2 M/S Keti Construction Ltd Indore Vastalya Chamebers, Sapna Sangeeta, 31/6, Sneh Nagar Vs. Main Road, Indore

Addition made by the AO Provision of 606485 - 606485 interest of TDS(AY 2012- 13) Provision of 307005 - 307005 interest of TDS(AY 2013- 14) Provision of 7353319 7353319 - Income

THE DCIT CIRCLE 5(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S L N MALVIYA INFRA PROJECTS P LTD, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit, Circle 5(1) M/S. L.N. Malviya Infra Projects Bhopal Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.29, F/F Sector, Dwarka Vs. New Delhi

TDS, as the same is not allowable expenses. 3. On facts & in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.12;69,0751- made by the A.O on account of travelling expenses.". 2. Ground no.1 is regarding the addition made by the AO on account of interest on GST/service tax by invoking explanation

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshishri Vimal Todi, Additional Commissioner बनाम/ 501, Darshan Residency, Of Income-Tax, Vs. 104-105, Anand Bazar, Indore Indore

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax ('ACIT') on the basis of which a notice was issued on 28th August, 2012 by the ACIT asking the Assessee to show cause as to why penalty be not levied under Sections 271D and 271E of the Act as a result of the contravention of Sections 269SS and 269T of the Act. A further notice

M/S RAJENDRA AGRI PRODUCTS P LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT (TDS) , BANGALURU

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirajendra Agri Product P. Dcit Ltd. Cpc Banglore Vs. 302, Royal House,11/13 Usha Ganj Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcr 3053 L Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2023

TDS amount of Rs. 12,90,954/- is seen paid on 31/10/2018 which is not within the stipulated time line" 4.The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in confirming the additions