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. 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

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

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

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

VAIBHAV MITTAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT 4(1),IND, INDORE

Appeal is dismissed

144 of the Act was passed on\n25/11/2019 at total assessed income of Rs. 12,27,885/- while raising\ndemand of Rs. 6,33,310/-. Subsequently, appellant had filed a rectification\nrequest against this order dated 25/11/2019 as TDS credit of Rs. 1,44,565/-\nwas not allowed though reflecting in Form 26AS of A.Y. 2012-13.\nThereafter

INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. PURUSHOTTAM GUPTA, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed and\n\"impugned order” is set aside

Section 253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The Revenue is aggrieved\nby the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/\n1060613547(1) dated 07.02.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250\nof the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned\norder\". The relevant Assessment Year

PRAVEEN AGRAWAL ,INDORE vs. DCIT 4(1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

TDS & Disallowance for such default\n(iii)\nUnsecured Loans\n2.2 That as and by way of an assessment order bearing\nNo.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1035802484(1) dated 22.09.\n2021 the total income of the assessee was computed at\nRs.2,20,33,310/- u/s 143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act, which is\nhereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”.\n2.3 That the assessee being

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

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

RAJ KUMAR PALIA,BHOPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - ITARSI, CAMP AT BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2009-10 Raj Kumar Paliya Dcit/Acit M/S. Da Construction

144 of the Act. Further, it is evidence from the chart that the items stated at Serial Nos. 5, 6 & 7 of chart in para 9 above were acquired on 13.02.2009 and 30.03.2009. Therefore, the AO has to examine the same whether these dumpers and trucks were actually put to use during the financial year ending on 31st March

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

section 37(1) of the Act but the said expenditure cannot be regarded as expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assesse. The income tax liability as well as interest as income tax liability cannot be allowed as expenditure incurred for the business of the assesse. 8. We further note that this tribunal in case