HARLEEN KAUR BHATIA,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2015-16

144, Pipliyarao, Near Vs. Indore Vishnupuri Colony, A.B. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AMGPB3531P Assessment Years: 2015-16 Smt. Gurvinder Kaur Bhatia Pr.CIT-2 13-14, Aditya Nagar, Near Vs. Indore Vishnupuri Colony, A.B. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AGJPB0037B Assessee by S/Shri Sumit Nema & Shri GaganTiwari, ARs Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantry, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 15.10.2019 Date

GURVINDER KAUR BHATIA ,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2015-16

144, Pipliyarao, Near Vs. Indore Vishnupuri Colony, A.B. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AMGPB3531P Assessment Years: 2015-16 Smt. Gurvinder Kaur Bhatia Pr.CIT-2 13-14, Aditya Nagar, Near Vs. Indore Vishnupuri Colony, A.B. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AGJPB0037B Assessee by S/Shri Sumit Nema & Shri GaganTiwari, ARs Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantry, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 15.10.2019 Date

PRAFULL KUMAR VIJAYVERGIYA CONSTRUCTION,SHAJAPUR vs. I.T.O., SHAJAPUR

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2011-12 Praffull Kumar Ito, Vijayvergiya Construction, Shajapur 1,Shujalpur Mandi, बनाम/ M.G.Road, Vs. Shajapur (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aakfp2575P Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2024

section 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2011-12, the assessee has filed this appeal. 2. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the AO, on receipt of certain information revealing that the assessee was having contract receipts as well as TDS

SHRI MANISH CHOUDHARY,INDORE vs. I.T.O. WARD 5(4), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoshri Manish Choudhary, Ito-Ward 5(4) 393, Goyal Vihar, Near Khajrana Indore Vs. Temple, Ring Road Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aelpc3990C Assessee By Shri Pranay Goyal & Sn Goyal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2024

TDS which has been duly deducted and paid by the employer as reflecting in form No. 16 as well as in form no. 26AS of the assessee amounting to Rs. 73,212/- while making the subject additions.” 2. At the time of hearing Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that while passing ex-parte order u/s 144 r.w. section

M/S. M. LODHA IMPEX,RATLAM vs. THE ITO-1, RATLAM

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 185/Ind/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2000-01 M/S.M.Lodha Impex, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, 117-118, Manak Chowk, Ward 1, Ratlam. Ratlam.

TDS has been claimed. 2.3 0rder passed u/s 119(2)(b) after 3 years of application: The application u/s 119(1)(b)(c) was filed on 21-12-2004 before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income tax which was decided on 17-01-2008. The application filed ought to have been decided within the reasonable time i.e. order passed after

M/S. S.R. FERRO ALLOYS,JHABUA vs. THE PCIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanis.R. Ferro Alloys Pr. Cit, Central 9, Siddheswar Colony Bhopal Vs. Jhabua (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Abhfs7377Q Appellant By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.11.2023

144, in case he is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the assessee or where the method of accounting have not been regularly followed by the assessee, Once the assessee followed accounting regularly the Assessing Officer is bound to assess the income of the assessee on the basis of such method of accounting On perusal of the provision

THE ACIT 3(2), INDORE vs. M/S. SIMRAN DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ito-3(2), M/S. Simran Developers Indore 402, Mark Building, बनाम/ Saket Square, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Ackfs 1946 B Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By None Date Of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

144" Thus, it is clear that if the AO has any doubt about any expenditure claimed by the appellant, the provisions of section 145 should be applied and profit should be determined at reasonable figure. All the payments made to the aforesaid three contractors were by account payee cheques. The department has not pointed out any instances where

DCIT CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133(6) of the Act. The lenders confirmed their transactions. It appears from the documents that the amounts were borrowed by the appellant for business purposes and interest was paid and TDS was further deducted. Moreso, the transactions were made through normal banking channels. Further that, the financial statements furnished by those lenders establishing the substantial turnover and other

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133(6) of the Act. The lenders confirmed their transactions. It appears from the documents that the amounts were borrowed by the appellant for business purposes and interest was paid and TDS was further deducted. Moreso, the transactions were made through normal banking channels. Further that, the financial statements furnished by those lenders establishing the substantial turnover and other

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133(6) of the Act. The lenders confirmed their transactions. It appears from the documents that the amounts were borrowed by the appellant for business purposes and interest was paid and TDS was further deducted. Moreso, the transactions were made through normal banking channels. Further that, the financial statements furnished by those lenders establishing the substantial turnover and other

JIKAR HUSSAIN,MAHIDPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AGAR MALWA

In the result we are of the considered opinion that the

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshijikar Hussain, Ito, Ujjain बनाम/ 309, Gram Gogapur, Vs. Mahidpur, Ujjain Madhya Pradesh (Pan: Aceph0619L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

144 are wrong and invalid. GROUND NO. 02: That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case addition of Rs. 1290750/-made to the total income of the appellant is also wrong, invalid and unjustified as: (a) the entire amount of gross contract receipt has been treated as income; (b) whereas as per section 44AD only

RENUKA ANSINGKAR,BHOPAL vs. ITO-2(4), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raorenuka Ansingkar Ito-2(4) 168, Indus Empire, Near Rajiv Bhopal Vs. Gandhi College, Trilanga Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aespa6372 D Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2024

section 144 which is contrary to the material on records and provisions of the Act, unjustand bad in law. 2.On the facts and circumstances of the case and applicable law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in not providing the copy of the reasons to believe recorded to issue notice u/s 148 Page 1 of 4 SMC-Renuka Ansingkar Page

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., UNIT SATNA CEMENT WORKS,SATNA vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeals

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

TDS under section 195. 13. We notice that to give effect to the order of this Tribunal dated 24.12.2014 proceedings were initiated by ITO (IT&TP), Bhopal in the case of the appellant. As per para 58 of the ITAT's order, it was held by the ITAT that the scope of Section

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., UNIT SATNA CEMENT WORKS,SATNA vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeals

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

TDS under section 195. 13. We notice that to give effect to the order of this Tribunal dated 24.12.2014 proceedings were initiated by ITO (IT&TP), Bhopal in the case of the appellant. As per para 58 of the ITAT's order, it was held by the ITAT that the scope of Section

THE DCIT, 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. MODERN LABORATORIES, INDORE

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

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./ ./ ./ I.T.A. No.277 & Co.16/Ind/2014 ./ "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09

TDS was also deducted under section194H. In remand report proceedings , the AO issued notice under section 133(6) to all commission agents and all of them have confirmed rendering services and receiving commission. The AO disallowed commission payment on the reasons that in some cases bills are of different dates and rate of commission of 2.24% to MPLUN whereas rate

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS on several other payments made during the year and consequently, no disallowance was called for under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9.1 We further find that the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of the assessee itself for the A.Y. 2009-10 vide order dated 10.11.2014 approved the net profit rate of 5% in the business carried

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS on several other payments made during the year and consequently, no disallowance was called for under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9.1 We further find that the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of the assessee itself for the A.Y. 2009-10 vide order dated 10.11.2014 approved the net profit rate of 5% in the business carried

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS on several other payments made during the year and consequently, no disallowance was called for under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9.1 We further find that the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of the assessee itself for the A.Y. 2009-10 vide order dated 10.11.2014 approved the net profit rate of 5% in the business carried