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

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.” Page 5 of 27 ITANo.229/Ind/2023 M/s Rana & Joshi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. 4.1 Thus, the period of limitation has been extended upto 28.02.2022 as this

SITARAM MUCHHALA,MARDANA vs. ITO KHARGONE, KHARGONE

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

67,853, including: 1. Addition under Section 45 (Capital Gains on Compulsory Acquisition) -Rs 24,79,657 2.Addition under Section 56 (Interest Income on Compensation) Rs.7,12,816 3. Income originally declared by the appellant-Rs. 1,75,380 6.4 After due consideration of all the facts available on record, the additions of Rs 31,92,473 are upheld

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

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

CHANDUMAL THARWANI,BETUL vs. DCIT ITARSI, ITARSI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2017-18 Chandumal Tharwani, Dcit, Betul Ganj

67 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed following application for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons of delay: Page 1 of 5 Chandumal Tharwani, Betul ITA No. 3/Ind/2024 - A.Y. 2017-18 Page 2 of 5 Chandumal Tharwani, Betul ITA No. 3/Ind/2024 - A.Y. 2017-18 Page 3 of 5 Chandumal Tharwani

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

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

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. Andritz Hydro Private Ltd. ITANo.198 & 199/Ind/2020 13. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee co. has two business units viz. Mandideep Unit near Bhopal and Prithla Unit near Faridabad. Till 2008, these units were housed under 2 separate companies

KISHORE SEWANI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi & Kishore Sewani, Ito-1(4) बनाम/ House No.33, Parika Bhopal Vs. Society, Phase-1, Chunabhatti, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Ankps8260M Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025

67,430/- registration and stamp duty of new property purchased. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first- appeal but the CIT(A) passed ex-parte order due to non-prosecution by Page 2 of 8 Kishore Sevani ITA Nos.517/Ind/2024 & ITANo.248/Ind/2025 – A.Y. 2013-14 assessee and upheld AO’s order. Still aggrieved, the assessee has come in next appeal before

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

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

Appeal are allowed

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

67,000/- 1989-90 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 36,03,735/- 1990-91 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 1,25,14,739/- 1991-92 28.09.1993 29.09.1993 84,32,536/- 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

RAMESHCHAND BADLANI,INDORE vs. ACIT 4 (1), INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2014-15 Rameshchand Badlani Acit 4(1) 43, Ananda Colony Indore बनाम/ Khajrana Road Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aehpb0735J Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 3. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in the memorandum of appeal are as follows: “1. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in passing the ex-parte order without giving proper and effective opportunity of being heard to the appellant

INCOME TAX OFFICER INDORE 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

NIDHI JAIN,BHOPAL vs. ITO 3(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaassessment Year:2015-16

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed her return of income of AY 2015-16 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,27,600/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the notices u/s 143(2)/142(1) were issued. Initially, the assessee