THE ADDL. CIT RANGE -1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

gainfully refer to the decision in the case of BEW Cable & Conductors Pvt Ltd in'lTA No.l070/Kol/2012 dated 03.02.2016 wherein on similar facts and circumstances, the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal had deleted the disallowance ofk loss incurred by the assessee in commodity transactions on NMCE during FY 2008-09, which was disallowed by the AO on the ground

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 (1), INDORE vs. SHRI MUKESH AGRAWAL, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2005-06

Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,39,798/- made by the AO in respect of purchase of scrap without appreciating the factual position that the assessee has not submitted any purchase bill and not furnished

M/S ROCKBED RENOVATORS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirockbed Renovators Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 7-A, Panjabi Bagh Raisen Road Bhopal Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacr7151G Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2024

194C as mentioned in para 3 of the show cause notice. The Commissioner has recorded that in the notice u/s 142(1) the assessee was asked to furnish the name, PAN address, E-mail ID of the sub-contractors however, the compliance of these pointes were not made. This statement of the Pr. CIT is in Page

SHRI LAV NARANG,UJJAIN vs. PCIT,, UJJAIN

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2015-16

194C and 194J( As per 26AS) are more than the receipts shown in ITR5/5/6”. Notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were served upon the assessee. It was admitted before Ld. AO that books of account are not maintained, statutory requirement of getting the books of account audited u/s 44AB of the Act not complied

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

capital gain\nescaped taxation in your hands.\nIn view of the above narrated facts the source of the amount i.e. Rs.41520000/-\nremains unexplained and therefore escaped assessment to that extent for the\nfinancial year under consideration within the meaning of provision of section\n147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\"\nGurdeep Singh Chhabra\nITA No.726/Ind/2024 & CO No.14/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2014-15\nYou

SAHARAYN UNIVERSAL MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

194C\n622392\nCooperative Educator Exp.\n6484695661\n(Less: cooperative Educator Expenses\nFalling below the threshold exemption\nLimit u/s 194H on which TDS was\nNot deductable\n466918841\n6017777180\nOffice rent and utility charges.\n38400000\nProfessional charges.\n5266086\n6064910523\n30% of the expenses of Rs.6064910523\nDisallowable u/s 40(a)(ia)\nNet loss returned\n1819473157\n(4622681240)\nPage 7 of 28\nSaharayn Universal