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

151 of the Act is also mechanical in nature. She further stated that the reasons 4 Jai PrakashShahani– A.Y 2014-15 on the basis of which the case of the assessee has been reopened are regarding alleged bogus purchase transaction of Rs.1,94,07,890/- escaped from levy of tax but Ld. A.O has finally accepted the genuineness

RITESH BANSAL,KHAJURI BAZAR, INDORE vs. PCIT, INDORE-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, OPP. WHITE CHURCH, WHITE CHURCH ROAD, RESIDENCY AREA, INDORE

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaassessment Year:2014-15 Ritesh Bansal, Pr. Cit-1, G-16, Ganesh Complex Indore बनाम/ Khajuri Bazar, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Acipb4025C Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal & Harshit Chowkse, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.01.2025

151 of the Act.” 6. Then, Ld. AR drew our attention to various notices issued by AO u/s 142(1) and replies filed by assessee in Paper-Book as under: (a) The AO issued notice u/s 142(1) dated 21.01.2022 with following Annexure to assessee: “ANNEXURE In connection with your assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2014-15 before

MANISH CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 148 was issued and the proceeding was carried by the Ld. AO. Upon verification of computation of income it was found that the assessee had shown exempt long term capital gain on purchase/sale of shares at Rs. 74,88,105/-. The assessee in total purchased 2,00,000 quantity of scrip of M/s. Splash Media Works Ltd. from

ASHISH CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 148 was issued and the proceeding was carried by the Ld. AO. Upon verification of computation of income it was found that the assessee had shown exempt long term capital gain on purchase/sale of shares at Rs. 74,88,105/-. The assessee in total purchased 2,00,000 quantity of scrip of M/s. Splash Media Works Ltd. from

MANISH CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 148 was issued and the proceeding was carried by the Ld. AO. Upon verification of computation of income it was found that the assessee had shown exempt long term capital gain on purchase/sale of shares at Rs. 74,88,105/-. The assessee in total purchased 2,00,000 quantity of scrip of M/s. Splash Media Works Ltd. from

PAWAN KUMAR CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 148 was issued and the proceeding was carried by the Ld. AO. Upon verification of computation of income it was found that the assessee had shown exempt long term capital gain on purchase/sale of shares at Rs. 74,88,105/-. The assessee in total purchased 2,00,000 quantity of scrip of M/s. Splash Media Works Ltd. from

SEEMA LUNAWAT,RATLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDSAUR

Appeal is allowed

151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\nA copy of the satisfaction note recorded before issuing notice under Section\n148 of the Act.\n(b) The AO only provided a copy of the \"reasons to believe\" and failed to furnish the\nrequired copy of the PCIT's approval. This non-compliance is a clear violation of\nprocedural safeguards, rendering

YAKSHA INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANY (P) LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN FROLIC REALTY (P) LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(1) , INDORE

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

purchase and sale, frequency of transactions, etc.?” 5. The brief fact leading to the case is this that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, engaged, in the business of trading of pulses and other commodity. The company was incorporated on 31.03.2017 under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office at Mumbai which was subsequently transferred

DCIT-4(1), INDORE vs. M/S. YAKSHA INFRASTRUCTURE COM. PVT. LTD., TALOJA, RAIGARH

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

purchase and sale, frequency of transactions, etc.?” 5. The brief fact leading to the case is this that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, engaged, in the business of trading of pulses and other commodity. The company was incorporated on 31.03.2017 under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office at Mumbai which was subsequently transferred

SHIV NARAYAN SHARMA,INDORE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

2 that – “……..These transactions are accommodation entries mostly in lieu of cash of equal amount and commission charged over and above at certain fixed percentage for providing such accommodation entry……” [Para 3.1] In the instant case, Ld. AO erred in not considering the fact that the shares were purchased through banking channel and cheque was issued to M/s. P. Saji

PRAYANK JAIN,INDORE vs. ACIT5(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

2 that – “……..These transactions are accommodation entries mostly in lieu of cash of equal amount and commission charged over and above at certain fixed percentage for providing such accommodation entry……” [Para 3.1] In the instant case, Ld. AO erred in not considering the fact that the shares were purchased through banking channel and cheque was issued to M/s. P. Saji

SAPAN SHAH,INDORE vs. ACIT-4(I), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

2 that – “……..These transactions are accommodation entries mostly in lieu of cash of equal amount and commission charged over and above at certain fixed percentage for providing such accommodation entry……” [Para 3.1] In the instant case, Ld. AO erred in not considering the fact that the shares were purchased through banking channel and cheque was issued to M/s. P. Saji

GOVIND HARINARAYAN AGRAWAL HUF,INDORE vs. I T O 2(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

2 that – “……..These transactions are accommodation entries mostly in lieu of cash of equal amount and commission charged over and above at certain fixed percentage for providing such accommodation entry……” [Para 3.1] In the instant case, Ld. AO erred in not considering the fact that the shares were purchased through banking channel and cheque was issued to M/s. P. Saji

MANISH GOVIND AGRAWAL HUF,INDORE vs. I T O 2(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

2 that – “……..These transactions are accommodation entries mostly in lieu of cash of equal amount and commission charged over and above at certain fixed percentage for providing such accommodation entry……” [Para 3.1] In the instant case, Ld. AO erred in not considering the fact that the shares were purchased through banking channel and cheque was issued to M/s. P. Saji

DARSHAN KUMAR PAHWA,INDORE vs. DCIT CIRCLE5(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

2 that – “……..These transactions are accommodation entries mostly in lieu of cash of equal amount and commission charged over and above at certain fixed percentage for providing such accommodation entry……” [Para 3.1] In the instant case, Ld. AO erred in not considering the fact that the shares were purchased through banking channel and cheque was issued to M/s. P. Saji

GLOBUS HOUSING,BHOPAL vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the “impugned

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

151 of the Act is also followed in the instant case. The assessee has received as accommodation entry of Rs.87,20,000/- in its books of Page 5 of 15 Globus Housing ITA. No.872/Ind/2024 – A.Y. 2014-15 accounts from M/s. Jay Jyoti India Pvt. Ltd. which was a paper concern floated by the Shri Sharad Darak. The reason for escapement