SHILPA MALIK,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(3), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical\npurpose

2) is bad in law.\n6. That the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the\nAO in invoking the provisions of Section 50C of the Act and\nthereby making an addition of Rs.22,04,700/-. That on the facts\nand in the circumstance of the case, addition is wrong, uncalled\nfor and deserves to be deleted

SHRI BABULAL MUKATI, INDORE,INDORE vs. PR. CIT -1 , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI RADHESHYAM MUKATI , INDORE,INDORE vs. THE PR CIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI KAILASH CHANDRA MUKATI, INDORE,INDORE vs. CIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI MOTILAL MUKATI,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI TULSI BAI MUKATI,INDORE vs. THE PRICIPLE CIT 1, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI KAMAL KISHORE MUKATI,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI DILIP MUKATI,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI VISHNU MUKATI,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI ASHOK MUKATI,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1 , INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI AKASH MUKATI,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI MOTILAL MUKATI (L/H OF SHRI RAMCHANDRA MUKATI INDORE),INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI BADRILAL GOVINDJI MUKATI,INDORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 , INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

SHRI SHANKAR LAL MUKATI-INDORE,INDORE vs. AAYKAR BHAWAN, INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

condone the delay in filing of instant appeals and admit them for adjudication. 3. Assessee(s) has raised following common grounds of appeal in ITANos.870 to 874/Ind/2019:- GROUND I: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income tax -I, Indore ["the PCIT"] erred in invoking provisions of section

MOHAMMAD ZAHOOR QURESHI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-4(2), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Paresh M Joshi & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year: 2014-15 Mohammad Zahoor Ito 4(2), Qureshi, Bhopal House No.956, Bagh Farhat Afza Gate Ke Andar, बनाम/ Gali No.2, Vs. Near Rajesh Cycle Aishbagh Stadium, Bhopal

Delay condoned. Appeal taken for hearing. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That the assessee had filed his return of income on 26.02.2016 wherein a total income of Rs.2,14,400/- was declared. 2.2 That the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. 2.3 That the Department of Income Tax had an information that during the Financial Year

SANJAY SHARMA,INDORE vs. ITO-1(1), INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Sanjay Sharma, National E-Assessment बनाम/ 41, Kelod Kartal, Centre, Assessment Unit, Vs. Khandwa Road, Income Tax Department, Indore. Nfac,Delhi (Pan: Effps8527L) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Sanjay Sharma, Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 41, Kelod Kartal, 1(1), Vs. Khandwa Road, Indore. Indore. (Pan: Effps8527L) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Page 3 of 5 Shri Sanjay Sharma, Indore vs. NFAC, Delhi/ITO(1),Indore. ITA Nos.4 & 5/Ind/2014 – A.Y. 2013-14 Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeals and proceed with hearing. I.T.A. No. 04/Ind/2024: 3. In this app-eal, the assessee is aggrieved by income

SANJAY SHARMA,INDORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Sanjay Sharma, National E-Assessment बनाम/ 41, Kelod Kartal, Centre, Assessment Unit, Vs. Khandwa Road, Income Tax Department, Indore. Nfac,Delhi (Pan: Effps8527L) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Sanjay Sharma, Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 41, Kelod Kartal, 1(1), Vs. Khandwa Road, Indore. Indore. (Pan: Effps8527L) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Page 3 of 5 Shri Sanjay Sharma, Indore vs. NFAC, Delhi/ITO(1),Indore. ITA Nos.4 & 5/Ind/2014 – A.Y. 2013-14 Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeals and proceed with hearing. I.T.A. No. 04/Ind/2024: 3. In this app-eal, the assessee is aggrieved by income