KISHAN ASSUDANI,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, 3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal of the assessed is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshikishan Assudani, Acit 3(1), बनाम/ Prop. Kishan Assudani, Bhopal Vs. Plot No.6, Mainroad, Gandhi Nagar, Bhopal (Pan:Aeupa8876Q) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee By Shri Arpit Gaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Dr Date Of Hearing 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

91,650/- for the relevant assessment year as against the returned income of Rs.1,73,84,280/- thereby making additions of Rs.2,24,07,370/- by framing an Assessment Order under s.143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, which is quite unjustified, unwarranted, arbitrary, bad-in-law and void-ab-initio. 4. That, without prejudice to the above

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

JABBAR KHAN,DEWAS vs. CIT , UJJAIN

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2009-10 Jabbar Khan, Pr. Cit, Village-Siya, Tehsil-Dewas बनाम/ Ujjain Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Cndpk 0362 H Assessee By Shri Ashok Mahajan, Ar Revenue By None Date Of Hearing 26.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.10.2022

delay is condoned and the appeal is proceeding for hearing. 4. Briefly stated the facts are such that the revenue received an information from AIR that the assessee had made cash-deposit over Rs. 10 lack in bank account during F.Y. 2008-09 relevant to the AY 2009-10 under consideration. Ld. AO formed a belief that the impugned cash

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

delay of few days in filing departmental appeal. We find that due to Covid-19, the same happened. Therefore, the same is also condoned. 5 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 5. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of government works contract

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

delay of few days in filing departmental appeal. We find that due to Covid-19, the same happened. Therefore, the same is also condoned. 5 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 5. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of government works contract

THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

delay of few days in filing departmental appeal. We find that due to Covid-19, the same happened. Therefore, the same is also condoned. 5 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 5. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of government works contract

SHAILESH KALWADIA (HUF),UJJAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BPL-C(91)(1), BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

91) (1) बनाम/ MIG-8, Gauri Shankar Vs. Bhawan, Arvind Nagar, Ujjain (PAN:AATHS4241J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Ruchira Nerkar, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 19.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 27.03.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: (I) ITA No:- 464/Ind/2025 AY-2013-14 This is an Appeal filed

SHAILESH KALWADIA (HUF) ,UJJAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER BPL-C-(91)(1), UJJAIN

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

91) (1) बनाम/ MIG-8, Gauri Shankar Vs. Bhawan, Arvind Nagar, Ujjain (PAN:AATHS4241J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Ruchira Nerkar, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 19.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 27.03.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: (I) ITA No:- 464/Ind/2025 AY-2013-14 This is an Appeal filed

SARIKA BHANDARI,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RATLAM, RATLAM

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

91, Near IDBI Bank Ltd, Nandalalpura, Indore (PAN:AQDPB9598H) (Assessee/Appellant) Assessee by Revenue by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement बनाम / Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ratlam (Revenue/Respondent) S/Shri Kunal Agrawal & Harsh Choukse, ARs Shri Ashish Porwal, DR 08.10.2025 10.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S KALLYAN TOLL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, INDORE

In the result, appeals of the Revenue ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2017-18 Acit Central-2, M/S Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Indore Ltd., Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aacck1840M Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit Central-2, M/S Keti Sangam Infrastructure India Ltd., Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aadck0129Q Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Assessees By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 22.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

condone the delay in filing the revenue’s appeal and admit the same for hearing. 3. As the issues raised in all these appeals are mostly common and relates to same group of assessee, at the request of all the parties, these appeals were heard together and the same are being disposed of by this common order for sake

ACIT,CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S KRTI SANGAM INFRASTRUCTURE LTD , INDORE

In the result, appeals of the Revenue ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2017-18 Acit Central-2, M/S Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Indore Ltd., Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aacck1840M Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit Central-2, M/S Keti Sangam Infrastructure India Ltd., Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aadck0129Q Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Assessees By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 22.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

condone the delay in filing the revenue’s appeal and admit the same for hearing. 3. As the issues raised in all these appeals are mostly common and relates to same group of assessee, at the request of all the parties, these appeals were heard together and the same are being disposed of by this common order for sake

SHREEPAL HUMAD,INDORE vs. THE PR CIT-1, INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishreepal Humad Pr. Cit-1 Near Civil Hospital, Bus Indore Vs. Stand Road, Manasa Madhya Pradesh (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaxph1346 K Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21 .06.2023

condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” Accordingly, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in suo- moto cognizance for extension of the limitation, the appeal of the assessee is treated as filed within limitation. 5. In the case of assessee the assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on 15.12.2018 at a total income of Rs.10

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