MAHESH CHANDRA AGARWAL,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A), DELHI

Appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimahesh Chandra Agrawal, Cit(A), बनाम/ Prop. M/S Swarn Pushp Nfac, Vs. Jwellers, Delhi Sarafa Chowk, Indore (Pan:Aavpa8254B) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee By Shri Gowind Rinwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Dr Date Of Hearing 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1047981997(1) dated 13.12.2022 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant Assessment Year

RAJESH PRAJAPATI ,UJJAIN vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1) , UJJAIN

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2013-14 Shri Rajesh Prajapati, A.C.I.T., बनाम/ 15, Naliya Bakhal, Circle 2(1), Ujjain Ujjain Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Alnpp5190Q Assessee By Ms.Sonam Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2023

section 253(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, we hereby condone the delay in filing present appeal and proceed to adjudicate on merits. GROUND NO. 1: 7. In this ground, the assessee has challenged the disallowance of Rs. 44,32

MUSTAFA ALI THROUGH GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, AUN ALI OTIAWALA,NEEMUCH vs. ITO, NEEMUCH

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

32, Honda Showroom, Neemuch (PAN: ANGPA4533K) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA & AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 03.04.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani: These are three appeals filed by assessee. The ITA Nos. 536 & 537/Ind/2023 challenge two separate appeal-orders, both dated

MUSTAFA ALI THROUGH GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, AUN ALI OTIAWALA,NEEMUCH vs. ITO, NEEMUCH

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

32, Honda Showroom, Neemuch (PAN: ANGPA4533K) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA & AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 03.04.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani: These are three appeals filed by assessee. The ITA Nos. 536 & 537/Ind/2023 challenge two separate appeal-orders, both dated

MUSTAFA ALI THROUGH GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, AUN ALI OTIAWALA,NEEMUCH vs. ITO, NEEMUCH

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

32, Honda Showroom, Neemuch (PAN: ANGPA4533K) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA & AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 03.04.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani: These are three appeals filed by assessee. The ITA Nos. 536 & 537/Ind/2023 challenge two separate appeal-orders, both dated

SANTOSH CHATURVEDI,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purpose

condoning the delay in filing of appeal\nwithout properly appreciating the facts of the case.\n3. That the Ld. CIT erred in confirming the additions by way of\nadjustment while processing the return u/s.143(1) of Rs.\n1,45,55,100/- on account of contribution to provident fund, ESICGST\nwithout properly appreciating the facts of the case and submissions\nmade

HARE RAM MANDIR TRUST,BHOPAL vs. ITO-EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

32,130/-. As per the Income Expenditure account for AY 2014-15, it has been shown as Rs 10,66,435/-.  Order U/s 143(1) was passed on 02.02.2016 and application for rectification of demand is filed on 01.04.2022 which is beyond the period of 4 years”. 2.5 That amongst others one of the ground for the rejection

HARE RAM MANDIR TRUST,BHOPAL vs. ITO -EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

32,130/-. As per the Income Expenditure account for AY 2014-15, it has been shown as Rs 10,66,435/-.  Order U/s 143(1) was passed on 02.02.2016 and application for rectification of demand is filed on 01.04.2022 which is beyond the period of 4 years”. 2.5 That amongst others one of the ground for the rejection

INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

condone delay, admit these appeals and proceed with\nhearing.\n3. The background facts leading to present appeals are such that the\nassessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate. For AY\n2017-18 & 2018-19, the assessee filed its returns/revised returns of income\nu/s 139 declaring total incomes of Rs. Nil (with current year loss

SHREE RAJENDRA SURI SAH SAKH SANTHA MYD,RAJGARH, DHAR vs. THE ITO, DHAR, DHAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

condoning the delay in filing of appeal even when there was justifiable reason for delay in filing of the said appeal\n\n2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs.\n\n17,11,287/- to the total income of the appellant on account

ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

ACIT(1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

ACIT 1( 1 ), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

THE ACIT 1 (1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

ACIT1(1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

32,536/- 1992-93 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,21,47,911/- 6. The Ld. AO has mentioned in the assessment orders that a fire broke out in Room No.316 at Aayakar Bhawan on 25.07.1993 in which certain documents pertaining to the assessee were destroyed. Thereafter a separate panchnama was prepared for the burnt documents and the documents saved from fire

SANTOSH CHATURVEDI,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purpose

condoning the delay in filing of appeal\nwithout properly appreciating the facts of the case.\n3. That the Ld. CIT erred in confirming the additions by way of\nadjustment while processing the return u/s.143(1) of Rs.\n1,45,55,100/- on account of contribution to provident fund, ESICGST\nwithout properly appreciating the facts of the case and submissions\nmade