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

ab-initio void hence assessment order passed should have been quashed. 03) Issue: Validity of Information for issuance of notice under section 148 : That the Commissioner of Income tax (A) erred in law in not appreciating the fact that notice under section 148 of the Act was based on information received from SEBI regarding transactions in equity shares

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. SHRI RITESH JAIN, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

ab initio for want of valid notice u/s 143(2) as per law as evident from fact that when return in response to notice u/s 148 was admittedly filed on 27/04/2016 notice u/s143(2) is issued on very same day that is 27/04/2016 which shows non application of mind in issuing notice u/s 143(2) and thereafter in framing

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

ab initio. Without prejudice to additional ground taken above: B. Apropos ground no. 1, 2 and 6 – Cancellation of the registration u/s 12AA retrospectively by invoking provisions of section 12AA(3) and 12AA(4), since activities of the assessee are genuine and are being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust and thus provisions of section 12AA

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

ab initio. Without prejudice to additional ground taken above: B. Apropos ground no. 1, 2 and 6 – Cancellation of the registration u/s 12AA retrospectively by invoking provisions of section 12AA(3) and 12AA(4), since activities of the assessee are genuine and are being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust and thus provisions of section 12AA

M/S SHISHUKUNJ EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,THE SHISHUKUNJ INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, GRAM JHALARIA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX. AAYKAR BHAWAN,

ab-initio\nin as much as the learned Pr. CIT, Central, Bhopal, has not been vested with the power to\ndischarge the function of the Income-tax authority for purposes of section 10(23C) of the Act\nconsidering the Notification No. 52 & 53 dated 22/10/2014 issued by the CBDT.\n2. RELIANCE ON EX PARTE INTERNAL COMMUNICATION DT. 19.01.2024 ISSUED

M/S TRUBA EDUCATION SOCIETY ,BHOPAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

ab-initio in as\nmuch as the learned Pr. CIT, Central, Bhopal, has not been vested with the\npower to discharge the function of the Income-tax authority for purposes of\nsection 12AB(4) of the Act considering the Notification No. 52 & 53 dated\n22/10/2014 issued by the CBDT.\n2.\nRELIANCE ON EX PARTE INTERNAL COMMUNICATION DT.\n19.01.2024 ISSUED

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

Appeal is allowed

ab initio. Reliance in this regard was rightly\nplaced on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the\ncase of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 239 CTR (Bom) 183 : (2011)\n52 DTR (Bom) 71 : (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom). When an assessment\nframed by the learned AO is unsustainable in the eyes

M/S SIDDHULA;L,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2(2) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Siddhulal Patidar, Income-Tax Officer, 01,Gram Sallaiya, 2(2), बनाम/ Bawadia Kalan, Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Dhypp1740N Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2024

capital gain, which is bad in law, void ab initio, illegal, contrary to the facts, records, submissions and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. Page 1 of 14 M/s.Siddhulal Patidar, Bhopal vs. ITO, 2(2), Bhopal ITA No. 110/Ind/2023 – AY 2011-12 (2) That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in denial of deduction u/s 54B of the Income

BHAGWAT PRASAD MALVIYA,BHOPAL vs. ITO-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2014-15 Bhagwat Prasad Malviya Ito -3(1) 28, Crp Phatak Road Bhopal बनाम/ Bairagarh, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Afbpm8998M Assessee By Shri N.D. Patwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.12.2025

35,49,845. Page 4 of 12 Bhagwat Prasad Malviya A.Y. 2014-15 Section 54F: 9.13 The assessee claimed to have invested Rs. 1,53,57,901 in a fixed deposit, but this was in the name of a different person and not in the designated Capital Gains Account. The FD matured on 05.04.2014, and no evidence was provided that

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

ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 3. The Id CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of 3 Rs.30,00,000/- without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The appellant carves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds

LATE SMT SUSHILA BISARYA, BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, we are Shri Jignesh Lilachand Shah vs

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanilate Smt. Sushila Bisarya Pr. Cit-1 L.H. Pramod Bisarya Bhopal Vs. 125 Malviya Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aewpb 2587 D Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.08.2023

Capital Gain calculated by the assessee. Also no query was raised by the AO with regard to documentary evidence regarding cost of construction incurred by the assessee nor the same was furnished by the assessee during assessment." 8. It is pertinent to note that when the AO while passing the reassessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) on 31st July

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and\ncircumstances of the case, liable to be annulled.\n3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.\n5,42,75,671/- on account of Reserves & Surplus of mess A/c without\nconsidering the facts and circumstances of the case

DISTINT REALTY P LTD,INDORE vs. THJE DY CIT 2(1), INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2011-12 Distinct Realty Private Dy. Cit, Limited, 2(1), C-1, Panchwati Colony, Indore. बनाम/ Village-Talawali Chanda, Ab Road, Vs. District-Indore Pin-453771 (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaacd6057D Assessee By Shri G.K. Rathi, Advocate Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023

AB Road, Vs. District-Indore PIN-453771 (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) PAN: AAACD6057D Assessee by Shri G.K. Rathi, Advocate Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 10.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement 07.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 16.01.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), National

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI MOTILAL MUKATI LEGAL HEIR OF RAMCHANDRA MUKATI, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoito-1(1) Shri Motilal Mukati Indore (L/H Of Ramchandra Mukati 9, Kabir Khedi, Near Sukhliya Vs. Indore

ab- initio, not tenable in law and therefore liable to be quashed. 2. The Id ITO 1(4) erred in confirming the demand u / s 143 (3) read with Section 263. 3. The appellant carves leave to add or amend or modify the grounds of appeal" Page 1 of 4 SMC-Motilal Mukati Page 2 of 4 2. I have

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ab-initio and bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the\ncase in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer ignoring the claim\nmade by the appellant in respect of expenses which were claimed in the revised\ncomputation filed during the course