SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

condonation of delay and the appeal prior to amendments also did not make the imposition of late fees by Section 234 E to be ultra vires." 14. The findings of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has also escaped the consideration by Hon'ble ITAT. She accordingly requested that the same may kindly be considered to avoid any miscarriage of justice

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

condonation of delay and the appeal prior to amendments also did not make the imposition of late fees by Section 234 E to be ultra vires." 14. The findings of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has also escaped the consideration by Hon'ble ITAT. She accordingly requested that the same may kindly be considered to avoid any miscarriage of justice

JAYKRISHNAN NAIR,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3(1, BHOPAL

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

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/250/2024-25/ 1065879845(1) dated 20.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. Page 1 of 13 Jaykrishnan Nair

JAYKRISHNAN NAIR,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS, DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

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/250/2024-25/ 1065879845(1) dated 20.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. Page 1 of 13 Jaykrishnan Nair

SMT PUSHPLATA CHANDRAWAT,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CPC , BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandrawat, V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. House No. 34-Bg, Scheme No. 74-C, Vijay Nagar, Indore Pan-Adapc8144L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023

condone the delay in filing the present appeal. The assessee has raised the following grounds: “1. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in upholding the action of the AO in making addition of Rs.3,81,960/-, which is quite unjustified, unwarranted, excessive, arbitrary and bad-in-law. 2a). That, the learned

M/S RANA & JOSHI BUILDTECH P LTD,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Rana & Joshi Buildtech Pr. Cit-1 Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal (Formerly Known As M/S Rana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. ) Vs. 218 Civil Lines, Below Dainik Bhaskar Office Vidisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aafcr9858P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .09.2024

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. The assesse has raised following grounds of appeal: 1.“That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Pr. CIT erred in setting-aside the order passed by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 even

MS. SANGEETA CHOPRA,UJJAIN vs. THE PR. CIT. UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

delay hereby condoned. 3. The brief facts leading to the case is this that the assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 was completed on 27.10.2016 accepting the total income of Rs. 19,740/- as declared by the assessee in the return of income filed. The assessee is an individual and not having any income liable to tax as stated

SHRI GUPTNATH BAL SHIKSHAN SAMITI MACHALPUR,MACHALPUR vs. ITO WARD RAJGARH, RAJGARH

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in\nterms mentioned above

54 or section 54B or section 54D or section\n54EC or section 54F or section 54G or section 54GA or section 54GB or\nChapter VI-A exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to\nincome-tax, shall, on or before the due date, furnish a return of his income or\nthe income of such other person during the previous

JWALA MAHILA SAMITI,121 AB SCHEME NO 54 ,VIJAY NAGAR INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani\Nand\Nshri Paresh M Joshi\Nita No.578/Ind/2025\Njwala Mahila Samiti,\Nबनाम /\Ncit- Exemption,\N121 Ab Scheme No.54,\Nvs.\Nbhopal\Nvijay Nagar,\Nindore\N(Pan:Aabaj7364C)\N(Assessee/Appellant)\Nassessee By\N(Revenue/Respondent)\Ns/Shri\Npranay Goyal & S.N.\Ngoyal, Ars\Nrevenue By\Ndate Of Hearing\Nshri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr\N10.11.2025\N14.11.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement\Nआदेश / Order\Nper Paresh M Joshi, J.M:\Nthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Under Section 253 Of\Nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The \"Act\" For\Nsake Of Brevity) Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By\Nthe Order Bearing Number\Nitba/Exm/F/Exm45/2024-\N25/1066565769(1) Dated 10.07.2024\Npassed By The Ld.\Ncit(Exemption) Whereby The Application Of The Assessee Filed In\Nthe Form 10Ab For The Grant Of Final Registration U/S 80G(5) Of\Nthe Act Is Rejected, Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The\N\"Impugned Order\".\N2.\Nfactual Matrix\N2.1 That The Assessee Is A Duly Registered Society Vide\Nregistration No.03/27/03/16648/14 Dated 17.01.2014 Which Is\Nissued By The Society'S Registrar (Firms & Society'S, Indore\Ndivision, Indore). The Said Registration Certificate Is At Page 21 Of\Npaper Book Dated 17.09.2025 Filed By The Assessee Society.\N2.2 The Aims & Object Of The Assessee Society Are At Page-22\Nof The Paper Book Dated 17.09.2025 Which Is Reproduced By Us\Nbelow:\Njwala Mahila Samiti\Nita No.578/Ind/2025\Npage 22\Nप्रारूप क्र. 1\Nसमितियों के पंजीयन हेतु ज्ञापनपत्र\Nदेखिये नियम - 3\Npage 22\N1.\Nसंस्था का नाम\Nज्याला महिला समिति\Nसहायक पंजीयना\N2.\Nसंस्था का कार्यालय\N121-Ab. स्कीम नं.

54\n1\nपति श्री सुनील गुप्ता\nविजयनगर, इंदौर (म.प्र.)\n2\nडॉ. समता श्रीयास्तय\n293-K. महालक्ष्मी नगर,\nउपाध्यक्ष\nइंदौर (म.प्र.)\n3\nश्रीमती जूही गुप्ता\nED-26, स्कीम नं. 94. रिंग रेड,\nसचिव\nपति श्री संजय गुप्ता\nसांवरिया नगर, इंदौर (म.प्र.)\n4\nश्रीमती रथवा जौहरी\nF-40. एम. आई. जी. कालोमी\nमहासचिव\nपति डॉ. योगेश जौहरी\nइंदौर

RAVI AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-2, INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniravi Agrawal Pr. Cit 101-102, Kanchan Vihar, Indore Vs. Niranjanpur, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aorpa 2161 B Assessee By None Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 19.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.05.2023

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” 5. Thus the Hon’ble Supreme court extended the limitation from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 and also allowed 90 days from 01.03.2022 where the limitation

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

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

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

section 253(5) and the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, 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

SHAFIQUE MOHAMMAD,BHOPAL vs. ITO 3(1) BHOPAL, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose, subject

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2014-15 Shafique Mohammad, Ito-3(1) Hno.40, Rahat Manzil, Bhopal Street No.2, Noor Mahal, बनाम/ Imamigate, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Ctppm6867D Assessee By Ms. Sania Farhaz Memon, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.03.2026

section 148 are bad in law and invalid. Ground 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case cash deposited of Rs. 11,15,000 during the relevant assessment year is out of his business income of sweets and past savings of Rs. 3,05,000 and the rest amount was cash gift received from his brothers and sister

SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

condoned the delay in filing the present appeal. The assessee has raised following grounds: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld Pr. CIT erred in setting-aside the order as passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 by invoking

PRABHA TRIPATHI L/R OF LATE RAGHAV RAM TRIPATHI,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

54-55 Sagar Royal Villas, Hoshangabad Road Bhopal - 462026,\nMadhya Pradesh, wife and legal heir of Late Shri Raghav Ram Tripathi do hereby\nsolemnly affirm as under :-\n1. The assessment order for the relevant assessment year was passed on 27.11.2018 in\nwhich the total income of Rs.1,86,710/- was assessed by Learned Assessing Officer\nat Rs.96

SCIENCE FORUM FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH,GRAM MINDIA, SANVER ROAD vs. CIT(A), UJJAIN

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2017-18

Delay condoned. Matter admitted and taken up for hearing. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That an information was received in respect of assessee through AIMs module of TBA that the assessee during the period of demonetization from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 had made cash deposits amounting to Rs.42,70,836/- in the bank accounts maintained by it. 2.2 That notices

MAKSON HEALTH CARE P LTD,MANDIDEEP vs. THE DCIT/ACCIT-1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both appeals filed by the assesse in ITANo

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

condoned the delay in filing the present appeal. Therefore, this ground becomes infructuous. 6. Ground No.6 is regarding disallowance of interest made on account of interest free advances given by the assessee to sister concern. Ld. Sr. counsel has submitted that the assessee has given total loan and advance of Rs.7,76,09,009/- whereas the assessee

MAKSON HEALH CARE P LTD,MANDIDEEP vs. THE DCIT/ACIT1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both appeals filed by the assesse in ITANo

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

condoned the delay in filing the present appeal. Therefore, this ground becomes infructuous. 6. Ground No.6 is regarding disallowance of interest made on account of interest free advances given by the assessee to sister concern. Ld. Sr. counsel has submitted that the assessee has given total loan and advance of Rs.7,76,09,009/- whereas the assessee