KUSUM GEORGE JACOB,BHOPAL vs. ITO - 2(1) BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condone delay,\nadmit appeal and proceed with hearing.\n5. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the\nassessee “Late Shri George Jacob” was an employee of “Bharat Heavy\nElectricals Limited, Bhopal”. For AY 2012-13, the assessee did not file any\nreturn of income. The AO, on the basis of AIR information revealing that the\nassessee made

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

condonation of delay in filing appeal against quantum order. 6. That the authorities below erred in making addition towards the alleged unexplained investment

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

condonation of delay in filing appeal against quantum order. 6. That the authorities below erred in making addition towards the alleged unexplained investment

JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee before us are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

delay is hereby condoned in the interest of justice with respect to the impugned cases listed before us. On merits: 4. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in making and Ld. CIT (A) in confirming addition

JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee before us are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

delay is hereby condoned in the interest of justice with respect to the impugned cases listed before us. On merits: 4. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in making and Ld. CIT (A) in confirming addition

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

SEEMA SINHA,INDORE vs. ITO-4(4), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanismt. Seema Sinha Ito-3(4) C-508, Shehnai Residency Bhopal Vs. A.B. Road, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Alups4142A Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Harshit Bari , Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.03.2024

condoning the delay in filing of appeal and consequently, also erred in not admitting such appeal without properly appreciating the facts of the case. ITANo.499/Ind/2023 Seema Sinha 2 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under section

ZYKA MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee before us are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

unexplained investment and loans/advances. The assessment proceedings were completed ex-parte during the Covid-19 pandemic due to alleged non-compliance by the assessee.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned the delay

RAJESH KUMAR RATHORE,SEHORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 5, SEHORE, SEHORE

In the result, the impugned order is set aside as & by way of\nremand back to the file of the Ld

unexplained investments\", to be\ntaxed as per the provisions of Section 115BBE of the\nIncome tax Act, 1961.\"\n2.3\nThat it is also recorded in the “Impugned Assessment\nOrder” that following opportunities were given to the assessee\nwhich is tabulated & is reproduced herein :\n\" 1. Details of opportunities given\nType of notice\nCommunication\nDate of Notice\ncommunication\nDate of\ncompliance

SANDEEP KUMAR SONI,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 4(3), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhashri Deepak Soni, Ito-4(3), बनाम/ Prop. Ambalika Jewellers, Bhopal Vs. 18, Chowk Bazar, Bhopal (Pan: Acyps8020J) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Sandeep Kumar Soni, Ito-4(3), बनाम/ Prop. Ambey Jewellers, Bhopal Vs. 18, Chowk Bazar, Bhopal (Pan: Avgps0484F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 4. The brief facts leading to this appeal are such that the assessee- individual is engaged in jewellery business the name of M/s Ambalika Jewellers, Bhopal. For AY 2017-18 under consideration, the assessee filed return declaring a total income of Rs. 8,73,380/-. The case was selected under scrutiny

SHRI DEEPAK SONI, BHYOPAL vs. THE ITO 4 (3), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhashri Deepak Soni, Ito-4(3), बनाम/ Prop. Ambalika Jewellers, Bhopal Vs. 18, Chowk Bazar, Bhopal (Pan: Acyps8020J) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Sandeep Kumar Soni, Ito-4(3), बनाम/ Prop. Ambey Jewellers, Bhopal Vs. 18, Chowk Bazar, Bhopal (Pan: Avgps0484F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 4. The brief facts leading to this appeal are such that the assessee- individual is engaged in jewellery business the name of M/s Ambalika Jewellers, Bhopal. For AY 2017-18 under consideration, the assessee filed return declaring a total income of Rs. 8,73,380/-. The case was selected under scrutiny

ZYKA MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee before us are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

delay is hereby condoned in the interest of justice with respect\nto the impugned cases listed before us.\nOn merits:\nITA No. 580/Ind/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17)\n4.\nThe Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:\n\"1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO has\nerred in law and on facts in making

ZYKA MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, BHOPAL

delay is hereby condoned in the interest of justice with respect\nto the impugned cases listed before us.\nOn merits:\nITA No. 580/Ind/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17)\n4.\nThe Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:\n\"1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO has\nerred in law and on facts in making

ZYKA MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee before us are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

delay is hereby condoned in the interest of justice with respect\nto the impugned cases listed before us.\nOn merits:\nITA No. 580/Ind/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17)\n4.\nThe Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:\n\"1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO has\nerred in law and on facts in making

SHEETAL KAUSHAL,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 5(2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member)

delay in filing of Appeal be kindly condoned. 3. That the order of the learned lower authorities passed are unlawful and illegal. 2 Assessment Year. 2011-12 Smt. Sheetal Kaushal 4. That the learned lower authorities were not justified in not allowing proper and meaningful opportunity of being heard. Also the Learned ClT (Appeals) National Faceless E-Appeal Centre

SANJAY SAHU,BHOPAL vs. THE TH4E ITO 2(1), BYHOPAL

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2010-11 Sanjay Sahu, Ito 2(1), H.No.98-A Sector, Bhopal बनाम/ Kasturba Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Apyps1707D Assessee By Shri Shashank Sharma, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.02.2025

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed return declaring a Gross Total Income of Rs. 2,97,706/-, Deduction of Rs. 45,271/- under Chapter VI-A and Total Income of Rs. 2,52,440/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment

DR. NIRMALA RAI`,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidr. Nirmala Rai Ito 1(1) F-3, Janki Enclave Chuna Bhopal Bhatti Kolar, Road, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaupr8550J Assessee By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 05.06.2024

condoned the delay of 417 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1- That the AIR inquiry made is not lawful & not supported by the enacted law of income tax, rules, the re- assessment proceedings are vitiated in law. Page 3 of 6 ITANo.35/Ind/2024 Dr. Nirmala Rai 2- That no procedure followed

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. ITO 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

delay in filing in appeal may please be condoned since the assesse was under the bonafide belief that the protective assessment would automatically be cancelled since the Hon. Tribunal has upheld the substantive assessment. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) NFAC has erred in passing the order ex-parte since majority of the notices were uploaded on portal during the pandemic

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. ITO 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

delay in filing in appeal may please be condoned since the assesse was under the bonafide belief that the protective assessment would automatically be cancelled since the Hon. Tribunal has upheld the substantive assessment. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) NFAC has erred in passing the order ex-parte since majority of the notices were uploaded on portal during the pandemic