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

section 548 that purchase must be after the date of transfer. An amount of Rs. 1,53,57,901 claimed under Capital Gains

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

548 (SC). It also referred to a decision of the Supreme Court in Adityapur Industrial Area Development authority v. Union of India [2006] 5 Scale 321 (SC), where it was held that an exemption granted cannot be taken away, unless it is expressly provided for. In such cases where the Assessing Officer infers income for a charitable institution other than

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

548 (SC). It also referred to a decision of the Supreme Court in Adityapur Industrial Area Development authority v. Union of India [2006] 5 Scale 321 (SC), where it was held that an exemption granted cannot be taken away, unless it is expressly provided for. In such cases where the Assessing Officer infers income for a charitable institution other than

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

548 on visits by Mr. Amitva Sarkar to Istanbul/turkey; and the rest of expenditure is incurred on passport/visa fee of some persons. He submitted that all visitors are employees of assessee and a small amount of Rs. 2,500/- is incurred for passport/visa fee of Mr. Vivek Loiwal, director of company. He carried us to the country-wise breakup

M/S. S.R. FERRO ALLOYS,JHABUA vs. THE PCIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanis.R. Ferro Alloys Pr. Cit, Central 9, Siddheswar Colony Bhopal Vs. Jhabua (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Abhfs7377Q Appellant By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.11.2023

gains of the business. For these reasons, we are of the view that no substantial question of law arises. We, therefore, decline to admit question Nos. 2 and 3." 41. From perusal of all the judgments it has been consistently held rather a settled law that the action of revenue authorities cannot be held justified if they substitute another method