VIJAY KOTHARI,INDORE vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE

condoned.\n3.5 Ld. DR for Revenue left the matter to the wisdom of Bench without\nraising any objection.\n3.6 We have considered the explanation advanced by assessee and in\nabsence of any contrary fact or material on record, the assessee is found to\nhave a “sufficient cause” for delay in filing present appeal as explained by Ld.\nAR. We find

ROSHNI HOMI DAJI BAHU UDDESHIYA SHIKSHA AVM SARVAJANIK NYAS,INDORE vs. CPC, BENGLURU, BENGLURU

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2023-24 Roshni Homi Daji Bahu Cpc, Bengaluru Uddeshiya Shiksha Avm Sarvajanik Nyas, बनाम/ 119, Kanlindi Kunj, Vs. Pipliyahana Square, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaetr9004R Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2025

condones the delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. Keeping in view of the above, I am of the opinion that the AO has rightly denied exemption u/s 11 of the I.T. Act and rightly made addition of Rs. 1,03,26,610/- to the income of the appellant. Therefore, ground No. 1 to 6 are dismissed.” (viii

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S. MANISH AGRO TECH PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result grounds of revenue for A

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Condonation of Delay 2. The learned CIT-DR submitted that due to office procedure for filing appeal, the appeal against the order of learned CIT-3, Bhopal dated 27.08.2021; the appeal could be filed on 15.11.2021 with the delay of 8 days. The learned AR in all fairness, excepted that the delay of 8 days has been cause

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S. MANISH AGRO TECH PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result grounds of revenue for A

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Condonation of Delay 2. The learned CIT-DR submitted that due to office procedure for filing appeal, the appeal against the order of learned CIT-3, Bhopal dated 27.08.2021; the appeal could be filed on 15.11.2021 with the delay of 8 days. The learned AR in all fairness, excepted that the delay of 8 days has been cause

NARENDRA KUMAR MISHRA,BHOPAL vs. ITO-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

condone delay, admit\nappeal and proceed with hearing.\n4. The background facts leading to present appeal are as under:\n(i)\nThe assessee-individual is a differently-abled person. Originally, he\nwas a permanent employee of Central Govt. in the Department of\nTelecom for the period 01.12.1984 to 01.10.2000. Thereafter, w.e.f.\n01.10.2000, he was absorbed in BSNL, a public sector

NEHA TAMRAKAR,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, the “Impugned Order” is set aside as & by

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshineha Tamrakar, Ito -5(1), बनाम/ 177 A Sector, Indrapuri Bhopal. Vs. Bhopal(M.P.) (Pan: Ajtpt6475G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

H No. A- 177, Sector-A, Indrapuri, Bhopal. Hence, there is no plausible reason to accept that though the assessee was able to receive notice dated 16.12.2016, the earlier notices issued on the same address would not have been served on her. In view of the above factual position the grounds number 1 and 2 raised by the assessee questioning

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee company is engaged in the Financial Assistance for industrial development and infrastructure. It declared total loss at Rs.1,55,62,351/- in the return filed on 30.09.2015. The case was selected for limited

MR.VINEET SHRIVASTAVA,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( IT&TP), BHOPAL

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimr. Vineet Shrivastava Ito (It & Tp) E-7/795, Arera Colony Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bcxps 2544 H Assessee By Shri Rohit Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.06.2023

H Assessee by Shri Rohit Tiwari, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 22.06.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: This appeal by the assessee is against assessment order dated 30th June 2022 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Act for assessment year

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

h) DCIT Kotak Mahindra Investment Ltd (Mumbai –Trib) (i) CEE V Ratam Melting & Wires Industries (2008) 13 SCC 12. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative supported the orders of lower authorities. 13. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We find that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture of graphite electrodes, steel, activated

NANCY ANN MILLER EDUCATIONAL TRUST,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-EXEMPTION, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2018-19 Nancy Ann Miller Income-Tax Officer, Educational Trust, Ward-(Exemption), बनाम/ 64/67, Dhar Kothi, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaatn4010B Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.05.2024

2 of 14 Nancy Ann Miller Educational Trust, Indore Assessment year 2018-19 5. At first, we would like to extract the impugned order passed by CIT(A) in first-appeal: “5. Denial of exemption claimed u/s 11 of the Act: 5.1 The appellant filed return of income in ITR 7 for the A.Y.2018-19 on 31.08.2018. As per Section

HARI SINGH,RAISEN vs. ITO RAISEN, RAISEN

In the result “Impugned order” is set aside as and by way

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshihari Singh, Ito, Raisen बनाम/ S/O Sh. Dhara Singh, 86,Vill- Vs. Semri Khurd, Tehsil- Sultanpur, Raisen,Bhopal, Mp (Pan: Aiaps1986M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of a second Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072367517 (1) dated 21.01.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred

ADARSH SHISHU VIHAR,INDORE vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU AND ITO EXEMPTION WARD, INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2019-20 Adarsh Shishu Vihar, Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru & C/O Ca Rajesh Mehta, Ito (Exemption Ward), Rajesh Heeralal Mehta & Indore Company, Chartered Accountants, बनाम/ 203, Manas Bhawan Extn, Vs. 11, Rnt Marg, Near Hotel Shreemaya, Indore (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaaaa2270K Assessee By Shri Apurva Mehta, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 13 .06.2024

13 .06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 25.10.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of intimation dated 05.02.2021 passed by CPC, Bangalore [“AO”] u/s 143(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Page

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDUS EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, RAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

h)\nHon'ble Gujrat High Court Indian Panel Board Manufacturer Vs.\nDCIT Tax Appeal No. 655 of 2022 dated 21.03.2023.\n(ii)\nThe second reasoning given by CIT(A) in Para No. 3.10 of his order is\nsuch that after passing intimation u/s 143(1), the department has passed\nscrutiny assessment-order u/s 143(3) and the income assessed

SHRI SHARAD SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. ACIT ()CENTRAL), GWALIOR, BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Sharad Sharma Acit (Central), H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior बनाम/ 74 Banglows, T.T. Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amzps 9791D Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior बनाम/ 74 Banglows, T.T. Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: AMZPS 9791D Assessee by Shri Kunal Agrawal, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 31.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 11.11.2019 passed by learned

SHRI VISHWAMITRA SHIKSHAN SAMITI,INDORE vs. ITO 5(1) , INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Vishwamitra Income-Tax Officer, Shikshan Samiti, 5(1), 104, J. B. Complex, Indore. बनाम/ Race Course Road, Vs. Indore (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aajts1473J Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2024

2 of 12 Vishwamitra Shikshan Samiti, Indore Assessment year 2018-19 to the CIT for condoning the delay in filing audit report (Form No. 10B) but the assessee has not filed any condonation application to CIT. In coming to his conclusion, the CIT(A) has also relied upon decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. MARAL OVERSEAS LTD, KHARGONE

In the result, the “Impugned

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshideputy Commissioner Of Maral Overseas Ltd. बनाम/ Income Tax- 4(1) Maral Srovar, V & Po, Vs. Indore Khalbujurg, Kasrawad, Khargone, Bhopal (Pan: Aaccm0230B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satyajeet Goyal, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2026

H'ble ITAT, though are, all on record, are being filed again, for ready reference. Some of the facts which will have a bearing in deciding the issue are as under. 1. The company's public issue opened for subscription on 3rd September 1991. The cost of Page 12 of 56 Maral Overseas Ltd. ITA No. 569/Ind/2025 - A.Y.1992-93 the project

SHREE AMIZIRA PARSHWANATH SWETAMBAR JAIN TIRTH TRUST,AMIJHERA vs. ITO DHAR, DHAR

Appeal is allowed accordingly

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2022-23 Shree Amizira Parshwanath Ito Swetamber Jain Tirth Trust Dhar बनाम/ Amzera Sardarpur Vs. Dhar (Assessee/ Appellant) (Revenue/ Respondent) Pan: Aamts9264J Assessee By Shri Himanshu Gandhi, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2026

h) Hon’ble Gujrat High Court - Indian Panel Board Manufacturer Vs. DCIT Tax Appeal No. 655 of 2022 dated 21.03.2023. 6. Per contra, Ld. DR for revenue contended that the furnishing of audit- report in Form No. 10B by due date is a pre-condition for allowability of exemption u/s 11/12. Since the assessee has not fulfilled such condition

THE ACIT 4(1), INDORE vs. M/S SUYASH EXIM P LTD , INDORE

Accordingly, departmental grounds with regard to addition of Rs.1,81,847/- are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2011-12

condone the delay in filing the departmental appeal and admit the same for hearing. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and, in law, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in not appreciating the findings and establishment of the Assessing Officer. 2) On the facts