ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL vs. AISECT LTD. , BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

d. On verification of the bank statements of the creditors it is noticed that in all cases, at every moment of sales, the payment of sales received first from Assessee Company and thereafter purchase payments were made to sister concerns of the assessee company. The assessee had made payment to the suppliers for purchase of books. These suppliers have also

ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL vs. AISECT LTD. , BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

d. On verification of the bank statements of the creditors it is noticed that in all cases, at every moment of sales, the payment of sales received first from Assessee Company and thereafter purchase payments were made to sister concerns of the assessee company. The assessee had made payment to the suppliers for purchase of books. These suppliers have also

AISECT LTD. ,BHOPAL vs. ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

d. On verification of the bank statements of the creditors it is noticed that in all cases, at every moment of sales, the payment of sales received first from Assessee Company and thereafter purchase payments were made to sister concerns of the assessee company. The assessee had made payment to the suppliers for purchase of books. These suppliers have also

AISECT LTD. ,BHOPAL vs. ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

d. On verification of the bank statements of the creditors it is noticed that in all cases, at every moment of sales, the payment of sales received first from Assessee Company and thereafter purchase payments were made to sister concerns of the assessee company. The assessee had made payment to the suppliers for purchase of books. These suppliers have also

INCOME TAX OFFICER INDORE 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

131 days in filing both of these appeals. The\nrevenue/appellant has filed applications for condonation of delays\nsupported by affidavits. In these documents, Ld. DR for revenue explained,\nthe revenue has submitted following reason for delay:\n2.1 \"I, Sanjeev Kumar, presently posted as Income Tax Officer-5(1), Indore do\nsolemnly affirm as under:-\n1. I am assessing officer having

JAI PRAKASH SHAHANI,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradjai Prakashshahani, Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/S Jai Prakash Impex, Nfac, Delhi Vs. 73, New Palasia, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Apqps7948G Assessee By Ms. Ruchira Singhal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.04.2025

D E R This appeal by the assesse is directed against the order dated 25.10.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi for A.Y.2014-15 which is arising from the assessment order u/s 147 of the Act dated 31.03.2022 framed by NFAC, Delhi. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Learned

INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

131 days in filing both of these appeals. The\nrevenue/appellant has filed applications for condonation of delays\nsupported by affidavits. In these documents, Ld. DR for revenue explained,\nthe revenue has submitted following reason for delay:\n“I, Sanjeev Kumar, presently posted as Income Tax Officer-5(1), Indore do\nsolemnly affirm as under:-\n1.\nI am assessing officer having

DECENT INDUSTRIES P. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(2), BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

d) Form 2 (Return of Allotment) alongwith Board Resolution filed with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and acknowledgement thereof (Page no. 69 to 74 / 115 of Paper-Book). e) The assessee has received moneys through banking channel. Bank Statement of assessee and Copy of Bank Book as extracted from books of account of assessee (Page no.75 to 83 of Paper

BHARAT KALWANI,INDORE vs. ITO-4(3), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JM: The captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “the CIT(A)] of even date 18/12/2024 passed for Assessment Years (AYs) 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. Since common facts

BHARAT KALWANI,INDORE vs. ITO-4(3), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JM: The captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “the CIT(A)] of even date 18/12/2024 passed for Assessment Years (AYs) 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. Since common facts

BHARAT KALWANI,INDORE vs. ITO-4(3), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JM: The captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “the CIT(A)] of even date 18/12/2024 passed for Assessment Years (AYs) 2014- 15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. Since common facts

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAVI ARORA, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2011-12 Dcit-5(1), Shri Ravi Arora, Indore 1007, Khatiwala Tank, बनाम/ 236, Indraprasth Tower, 6, M.G. Road, Vs. Indore. (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Agdpa8921H Assessee By Shri Yash Kukreja, Ca & Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Adv & Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 31.01.2020 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-II, Indore [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 25.02.2014 passed by Dy. CIT, Circle 5(1), Indore, [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year

SADHU RAM BALANI,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisadhu Ram Balani Ito-5(1) Flat No.B-503, Moti Mahal Indore Apartment 28-A, Sector-C Vs. Scheme No.71, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abspb5367L Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2024

D-MAT accounts. Therefore, it is incorrect notion of the Revenue that these shares are bogus shares, on the contrary these shares are genuine and lawfully issued share by the company by following the law and procedure in this regard. The Assessing Officer has heavily relied upon report of Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department which was conducted in Kolkata

MR GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, INDORE

Accordingly. Thus, this ground is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Gaurav Ajmera, Dcit, बनाम/ 38, Ram Mohalla, Central Circle 2, Ratlam Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aglpa8863C Assessee By Shri Pawan Ved, Advocate & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.09.2023

D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 10.03.2022 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 29.12.2018 passed by learned DCIT, Central-2, Indore [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year

HIMANSHU BOTADEARA HUF,INDORE vs. THE ITO 4(3), INDORE

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assesse are

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These two appeals by the assesse are directed against two separate orders of ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, both dated 22nd February,2023, for the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 respectively. 2. The assessee has raised common grounds in these two appeals involving common and identical issue

HIMANSHU BOTADEARA HUF,INDORE vs. THE ITO 4(3), INDORE

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assesse are

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These two appeals by the assesse are directed against two separate orders of ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, both dated 22nd February,2023, for the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 respectively. 2. The assessee has raised common grounds in these two appeals involving common and identical issue

SHRI M A KHAN,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) It(Ss)A Nos.37 To 42/Ind/2015 & Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2010-11 Late M.A. Khan Acit 3(1) (Through L/H Nazhat Bhopal Parveen Khan) बनाम/ B-90, Housing Board, Vs. Kohefiza, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan:Aewpk 3620 C Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Shri Vijay Bansal, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by a consolidated appeal-order dated 28.11.2014 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Bhopal [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of a consolidated assessment-order dated 30.12.2011 passed by learned ACIT-3(1), Bhopal [“Ld. AO”] u/s 153A/ 143(3) of Income

POONAMCHAND NARAYANDAS SOONI,KHIRKIYA vs. ITO-2, HARDA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradpoonamchand Narayandas Income Tax Officer -2, Sooni, Harda Main Road, H. No.26, Vs. Khirkiya, Madhya Pradesh (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabfp3619H Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.08.2024 O R D E R

d 16 Manohar S/o Harsud 1,20,326 Moong PB-5 PB- 47-51 PB-8 Shri Atmaram 17 Dasharatha 50,596 Moong PB-5 PB-6 18 Ranjit Sarangpu 90,149 Moong PB-5 PB-7 r 19 Bhur Kudawa 79,674 Moong PB-5 PB-8 20 Narayan 1,04,200 Moong PB-5 PB-11 21 Sadasukh