VIJAY KUMAR PAREKH,INDORE vs. WARD1(1) INDORE, INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivijay Kumar Parekh Ito-Ward -1(1) 406-407 Apollo Tower, 2Mg Indore Road Vs. Indore-452001 (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afkpp 3277M Assessee By Shri Abhinava Jain & Sudhir Padliya, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2024

delay except assertion that it was not aware of the order passed and under bonafide belief that the objection raised under the provisions of section 154 to allow the set off the loss to the business income was accepted; cannot be a sufficient cause to condone

M.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2015-16

Income Tax Act 1961. Prayer was made to condone the delay. Ld. DR opposed the request. We however under the given facts and circumstances of the case, are satisfied with the reason giving rise to delay in filing the instant appeal. We condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case

KALPANA NARWARE,BETUL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BETUL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

business of petrol pump had contacted\nChartered Accountant, who initially informed her that the matter could be\nKalpana Narware\nITA No. 202/Ind/2025 - AY 2017-18\nBOMARY rectified and assured her that he would file a Rectification Application under\n42999/2025 Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, before the Income Tax Officer and\nMENT OF\nwould also discuss the matter

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAnil Turakhia,\n19 Rani Sati Colony,\nY.N. Road,\nIndore\n(Assessee/Appellant)\nAssessee by\nRevenue by\nDate of Hearing\nDate of Pronouncement\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025\n(AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15)\nबनाम /\nVs.\nITO 5(1)\nIndore\n(Revenue/Respondent)\nPAN

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

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

delay of\n78/74 days is condoned taking into account the explanation given by\nassessee in above application in the light of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs\nMst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387 having settled\nthe law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the\ncause of substantial justice.\n4. Brief facts

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAnil Turakhia,\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025\n(AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15)\n19 Rani Sati Colony,\nY.N. Road,\nIndore\n(Assessee/Appellant)\nAssessee by\nRevenue by\nDate of Hearing\nDate of Pronouncement\nबनाम /\nVs.\nITO 5(1)\nIndore\n(Revenue/Respondent)\nPAN

PURSHOTTAM RATHORE,RATLAM vs. ITO 1(2), UJJAIN

Appeal is partly allowed

business income of Rs.\n93,925/- under presumptive provisions of section 44AF which is in\naccordance with provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961.\n7. Finally, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has already offered proper\ntaxable income in the return of income filed to department. Further, the\nassessee is at present struggling with cancer and not in a position

RAMCHANDRA MANGILAL SARATHE,KHANDWA vs. ITO-I KHANDWA, KHANDWA

In the result, the appeal of the assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniramchandra Mangilal Ito-1 Sarathe Khandwa Gram Mathela Vs. Khandwa

condonation of delay in filing of appeal under section 254 of the Income Tax Act, before Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench- Indore. Relevant to A.Y. 2009-10. Dear Sir, With reference to above subject citation, we would like to inform you that the assessee is an agriculturist, engaged in the agricultural activities in his whole life. Also during

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAnil Turakhia,\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025\n(AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15)\n19 Rani Sati Colony,\nY.N. Road,\nIndore\n(Assessee/Appellant)\nAssessee by\nRevenue by\nDate of Hearing\nDate of Pronouncement\nबनाम / ITO 5(1)\nVs.\nIndore\n(Revenue/Respondent)\nPAN

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAnil Turakhia,\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025\n(AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15)\n19 Rani Sati Colony,\nY.N. Road,\nIndore\n(Assessee/Appellant)\nAssessee by\nRevenue by\nDate of Hearing\nDate of Pronouncement\nबनाम / Vs.\nITO 5(1)\nIndore\n(Revenue/Respondent)\nPAN

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay of 264 days in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). 6.2 In the assessment order the AO has taken the deposit made in the current year of the assesse as business receipts and adopted the presumptive business income

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay of 264 days in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). 6.2 In the assessment order the AO has taken the deposit made in the current year of the assesse as business receipts and adopted the presumptive business income

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay of 264 days in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). 6.2 In the assessment order the AO has taken the deposit made in the current year of the assesse as business receipts and adopted the presumptive business income

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay of 264 days in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). 6.2 In the assessment order the AO has taken the deposit made in the current year of the assesse as business receipts and adopted the presumptive business income

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay of 264 days in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). 6.2 In the assessment order the AO has taken the deposit made in the current year of the assesse as business receipts and adopted the presumptive business income

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay of 264 days in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). 6.2 In the assessment order the AO has taken the deposit made in the current year of the assesse as business receipts and adopted the presumptive business income

BHOPAL SWITCHGEARS (P) LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE D C I T 1(1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, this appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Bhopal Switchgears P. Ltd. Dcit -1(1) Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaacb 6092 J Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 23.09.2022

condone the delay and proceed for hearing of appeal. Ground No. 1: 5. The issue involved in Ground No. 1 relates to the disallowance of interest of Rs. 4,90,876/-. During assessment proceeding, Ld. AO observed that the assessee has paid a total interest of Rs. 19,63,506/- @ 24% on loans taken from different persons. Ld. AO observed

INDORE PRAGATISHIL SAHAKARI SAKH SANSTHA MARYADIT,INDORE vs. NFAC, DELHI, INDORE

Appeal stand allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2018-19 Indore Pragatishil Income Tax Department, Sahakari Sakh Sanstha Nfa, बनाम/ Maryadit, Delhi Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaaai3124L Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2024

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. 4. The assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds: “(1) The Ld. CIT(A) NFAC has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 10,38,997/- being interest received on fixed deposit on the bank as income from other sources. (2) It was proved before