IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194J read with clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [`Act', for short] which, inter alia, states that "fees for technical services" shall have the same meaning as contained in Explanation 2 to clause (vii) of Section 9(1) of the Act. Right from 1979 various judgments of the High Courts

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

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

Capital gains") for— (i) the transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of a licence) in respect of a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark or similar property ; (ii) the imparting of any information concerning the working of, or the use of, a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

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

Capital gains") for— (i) the transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of a licence) in respect of a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark or similar property ; (ii) the imparting of any information concerning the working of, or the use of, a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

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

Capital gains") for— (i) the transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of a licence) in respect of a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark or similar property ; (ii) the imparting of any information concerning the working of, or the use of, a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade

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

M/S. APEX REALITIES,INDORE vs. THE ITO 3(2), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2015-16

201, Puspratan Paradise, 9/5, New Palasia Indore : Respondent PAN ABAFA3997P Apex Realities ITA No.899 & 912/Ind/2018 Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantri, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri C.P. Rawka, CA Date of Hearing 07.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement 01.09.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M The above captioned appeals filed at the instance of the assessee and Cross appeal raised

THE ITO 3(2), INDORE vs. M/S. APEX REALITIES, INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2015-16

201, Puspratan Paradise, 9/5, New Palasia Indore : Respondent PAN ABAFA3997P Apex Realities ITA No.899 & 912/Ind/2018 Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantri, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri C.P. Rawka, CA Date of Hearing 07.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement 01.09.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M The above captioned appeals filed at the instance of the assessee and Cross appeal raised

MARIAMMA KURIAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradmariamma Kurian, Income Tax Officer 1(1) Mig-93 A-Sector, Bhopal Vs. Sonagiri Piplani, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abspk4941P Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.08.2025 O R D E R

201 ITR 747 (Cal.); Krishna Kumar Paliwal 9 IT] 348 (Trib. Indore); Shri Madhusudan Dhakad 44 IT] 401 (Trib. Indore) 4. The assessee in any case, purchased another agricultural land for Rs. 30.60 lakhs. This fact was also uncontroverted. Thus, the capital gains was invested in purchase of another agricultural land and was exempt u/s. 54B in any case

JCIT OSD (CENTRAL)-1, RATLAM vs. SHRI KANTILAL KATARIA, RATLAM

Bench: Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

201/- in the assessee’s income. 28. Aggrieved with the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), both the assessee as well as the Revenue have preferred cross-appeals before this Tribunal on the issue. 29. Before us, learned Department Representative (In short Ld CIT(DR) ) vehemently argued supporting the observation of Learned AO and the finding of Ld.CIT(A) given

ACIT (CENTRAL) 1 INDORE , INDORE vs. SHRI KANTILAL KATARIA, RATLAM

Bench: Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

201/- in the assessee’s income. 28. Aggrieved with the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), both the assessee as well as the Revenue have preferred cross-appeals before this Tribunal on the issue. 29. Before us, learned Department Representative (In short Ld CIT(DR) ) vehemently argued supporting the observation of Learned AO and the finding of Ld.CIT(A) given

AMIT ASHOK AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-2(2), INDORE

In the result, the quantum appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and penalty appeal of assesse is allowed

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

201, Devki Apts, E-27/28, Saket Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: ADVPA1904F Assessee by Assessee in person Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate order of Commissioner

AMIT ASHOK AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-2(2), INDORE

In the result, the quantum appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and penalty appeal of assesse is allowed

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

201, Devki Apts, E-27/28, Saket Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: ADVPA1904F Assessee by Assessee in person Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate order of Commissioner

ANDRITZ HYDRO P LTD,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

Capital Loan appearing in balance sheet at closing rate and recognizing the exchange rate difference in Trading Account as expenses or income, as the case may be. Similarly outstanding forward contract are marked to market and resulting loss or gain is being recognized as expenses or income in trading account. It may be mentioned that this method of recording transaction