SHRI PREMNARAYAN,HARSUD, KHANDWA vs. THE PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of the assesse in ITANo

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Premnarayan Pcit (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cjzpp1164J Smt. Sharda Pcit (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Fdxps2997P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 6.1 Thus, the assessment was reopened in case of assessee on the issue of assessing the capital gain arising from sale of the agricultural land in question by treating the same as situated within the distance of 2 km from Tehsil and District Harda as Page 11 of 26 ITANo.262 & 263/Ind/2024 Shri

NILIMA KOTHARI,INDORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSTT. CENTRE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Neelima Kothari, Income Tax Officer, 601, N.R.K. Villas, Delhi Vs. 22/2 Manoramaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adnpk7832J Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2024

Section 69C: Unexplained expenditure: That the Commissioner of Income tax (A) further erred in law in confirming the addition of Rs.1,22,341/- which was made solely on presumption that the appellant arrangec accommodation entry for earning long term capital gain and must have paid commission to the middleman. Addition so made u/s 69C of the Act and confirmation thereof

BIHARILAL,HOSHANGABAD vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NFAC-DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2018-19 Assessment Unit Of Income- Biharilal, Tax Department S/O Gaurishankar, 508, Ward No. 15, बनाम/ Shobhapur, Vs. Hoshangabad (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Eonpb2765E Assessee By Ms. Saniya Farhaz Memon, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026

144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2018-19, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds: Page 1 of 11 Biharilal ITA No. 278/Ind/2025 - AY 2018-19 “Ground1. Because the very initiation of proceeding us 147 and issuance of notice u/s 148 are bad in law, invalid and therefore, the assessment is liable

NARENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL,BURHANPUR vs. PCIT INDORE-1, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarendra Kumar Agrawal Pcit (1) 203, Ck Campus Aaykar Bhawan Bahadarpur Road Vs. Indore Burhanpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adapa0131B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2024

144B of Act was passed on 28/03/2022 accepting the returned income. 4. On perusal of the case records, it is observed that the assessee had sold three properties on 24/11/2015, 09/02/2016 and 31/03/2016 at the cost of Rs. 1,57,00,000/-, 1,81,50,000/- and 1,24,70,353/- respectively. He earned Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG

SANTOSH RATHORE,INDORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE - 1, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

capital gain of Rs.32.79,066/- declared by the\nassessee and claimed exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act is bogus, therefore, there\nis live nexus between the information available and the satisfaction recorded\nand, accordingly, Ld. CIT-DR submit that the case of the assessee was\nrightly reopened and prayed accordingly.\nPage 19 of 49\nSantosh Rathore\nITA No. 451/Ind/2024

URMILA SINGH,BHOPAL vs. ITO,2(3), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

capital gains without considering sale costs, and the assessee had not made submissions due to not receiving proper opportunities.", "held": "The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte orders of the AO and CIT(A) and remanded the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to cooperate and provide necessary details.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections

AJIT BONDRIYA,LIMASSOL, CYPRUS vs. ITO 2(5), BHOPAL, BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

sections": [ "147", "144", "144B", "148", "142(1)", "69", "148A", "151" ], "issues": "Whether the additions made by the AO on account of unexplained investment and capital gains

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

144B of the Act for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2014-15, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds raised in Appeal-Memo (Form No. 36). Page 1 of 31 Ritesh Bansal ITA No. 436/Ind/2024 – AY 2014-15 2. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee filed original return of income of relevant

SAULET SHAFEEQ,BHOPAL vs. ITO NFAC, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Saulet Shafeeq, Income-Tax Officer, M/S. Prime Transport, Nfac, 1,Shafique Villa, Delhi बनाम/ Ahamadabad Palace, Vs. Kohe Fiza, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Ceeps8075M Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar. Revenue By Shri K.Bala Murli Krishna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2024

144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2015-16, the assessee has filed this appeal. Page 1 of 3 Saulet Shafeeq, Bhopal ITA Nos. 105/Ind/2024 - AY 2015-16 2. Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall

JAYA GARG,INDORE vs. ACIT NFAC, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Jaya Garg, Acit-Nfac, C-4/5, Shivkripa Colony, New Delhi बनाम/ Sajan Nagar Road, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Agtpg 4247 L Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah Ca, Shri Soumya Bumb Ca, Ms. Ayushi Garg Ca & Ms. Anshika Goyal Ca - Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 5.04.2024

section 144B the of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2014-15, the assessee has filed this appeal. Page 1 of 18 Jaya Garg, Indore ITA No. 418/Ind/2023 – AY 2014-15 2. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed original return of income

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

Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3, Bhopal/IT-NFAC/2013- 14/10128987 dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Page

SHAILESH KALWADIA (HUF),UJJAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BPL-C(91)(1), BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for sake of brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing No:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1075250428(1) dated 29.03.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred

SHAILESH KALWADIA (HUF) ,UJJAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER BPL-C-(91)(1), UJJAIN

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for sake of brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing No:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1075250428(1) dated 29.03.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), INDORE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN INDORE vs. GURDEEP SINGH CHHABRA, INDORE

section 148 of Income Tax\nAct.\nINCOME TAX DEPARTMENT\nPRADUMAN KUMAR MISHRA\nITO 2(1), IND/\n(In case the document is digitally signed please\nrefer Digital Signature at the bottom of the page)\nIn response to above notice, the assessee filed reply dated 04.06.2022\n[Page 74 of Paper-Book] claiming that the transaction of sale took\nplace

M. P POLICE SAKH SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT UJJAIN,UJJAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -2(1), UJJAIN

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradm.P. Police Sakh Sahakari Ito 2(1), Sanstha Maryadit, Ujjain 32Nd Battalion, Vs. Dewas Road Nagari, Ujjain (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabam5551C Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2025 O R D E R

144B of the act. d. Allow the claim of the appellant.” 3. The assessee has raised as many as 15 grounds of appeal which are repetitive in nature and not inconsonance with the Income Tax Tribunal Rules. However the sole grievance is that the 3 M.P. Police Sakh Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit– A.Y 2020-21 Ld. CIT(A) erred in partly

INDORE MANDAL DAK TAR KARAMCHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA MY. INDORE,INDORE vs. THE ADDITIONAL CIT , INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniindore Mandal Dak Tar Acit Karamchari Sahakari Indore Vs. Sanstha Maryadit Dewas (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaaji 0159 C Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.06.2023

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, if deposit this amount in bank account then the interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members and eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. 7. He has submitted that the issue before the Hon’ble Supreme