THE DCIT-3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. M.P. ENTERTAINMENT & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

depreciation on the entire portion of the constructed building. ii) Even if the stand of the learned AO to the effect that the rental income and common area maintenance charges received by the appellant are respectively assessed under the head 'Income from house property' and 'Income from business

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3 (1), INDORE vs. M/S M.P. ENTERTAINMENT AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

depreciation on the entire portion of the constructed building. ii) Even if the stand of the learned AO to the effect that the rental income and common area maintenance charges received by the appellant are respectively assessed under the head 'Income from house property' and 'Income from business

SRK DEV BUILD PVT LTD.,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT 5(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Srk Dev Build Pvt. Ltd, Dcit/Acit-5(1) 18/2, Lasudia Mori, Indore बनाम/ A.B. Road, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaqcs3387P Assessee By Shri Pranay Goyal & S.N. Goyal, Cas Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.06.2024

business and profession but the Ld. AO was of the view that such income should be offered under the head income from house property. However, it is our humble submission that the penalty is such a scenario should not be levied on the following proposition: That, the assessee filed its return of income making exactly the similar claim of depreciation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAJEEV AJMERA, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Co No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Dcit-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Assessee By Shri Mahendra Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 आदेश/ O R D E R

income and expenditure account of the above said period for your reference. The property referred under this point is his business assets but due to clerical mistake of the assessee’s accountant it was shown in fixed assets schedule instant of current assets. An affidavit regarding this point is Page 8 of 17 Shri Rajeev Ajmera ITA No.51/Ind/2018& CO.No.23/Ind/2018

THE PR CIT CIRCLE 5 (1), BHOPAL vs. M/S M.P.WAREHOUSING & LOGISTIC CORPORATION, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit, Circle 5(1) M/S Mp Warehousing & Bhopal Logistics Corporation Office Complex, Block-1 Vs. Gautam Nagar Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Aadcm7742B Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr-Dr Assessee By Shri Shri S.S. Deshpande Ar Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.02.2024

business and thereby denied the claim of the assessee. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by considering the details of income as well as investments made by the assessee. 3. Before the Tribunal Ld. DR has submitted that the assessee has claimed additional depreciation

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

Depreciation as per Income Tax 4 (41,52,794) 5 [3-4] (50,35,56,149) Income considered separately 6 Dividend income 21,91,060 Rent received 8,65,707 Diminution in value of shares 8,90,772 (39,47,539) 7 Profit and Gains from Business

GOPAL MUWEL,MANAWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAR

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

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshigopal Muwel, Ito बनाम/ Morad, Manawar, Dhar Vs. Dhar (Pan: Caapm6256Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Lucky Singhal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

business head, the assessee is required to maintain the same for expenditure shown under the head “other sources”. It is an admitted position that there is no separate account for classification of income. Bank statements basis “classification” cannot be verified. No evidence for expenditure incurred to earn rental income. All these have been held against the assessee in the “impugned

PRASAM RAKESH CHOUDHARY,GIRNAR SOCIETY, BAPURAO GALLI, ITWARI, NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, BHOPAL , BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

depreciation claimed by assessee resulted only in loss and not reduced assessee’s positive income or taxable income of current year. The assessee is not a business

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BHOPOAL, BHOPAL vs. M/S RASHTRIYA TAKNIKI SHIKSHAK PRASHIKSHAN EVAM ANUNSANDHAN SANSTHAN, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

depreciation claimed by assessee resulted only in loss and not reduced assessee’s positive income or taxable income of current year. The assessee is not a business

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

Depreciation\nNet cost of production\nADIP Scheme\nADIP-SSA Scheme\nAddition of Fixed assets\nAddition in CWIP\nTotal Application of Income\nNet Accumulation for the year\nRs.5150.77 Lakhs\nRs.2050.00 Lakhs\nRs.24.85 Lakhs\nRs.4.08 Lakhs\nRs.24515.09 Lakhs\nRs.3677.26 Lakhs\nRs.14120.01 Lakhs\nRs.154.88 Lakhs\nRs.13965.13 Lakhs\nRs.5492.83 Lakhs\nRs.1878.73 Lakhs\nRs.193.98 Lakhs\nRs.47.04 Lakhs\nRs.21577.71 Lakhs\nRs.2937.38 Lakhs\nFrom the above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE vs. COMMANDER INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and CO of assessee are dismissed

business of generation and distribution of power through wind mill situated at Dewas, MP. The assessee has filed its return of income for the year under consideration u/s 139(1) of the Act on 24.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.5,93,68,577/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and accordingly notice u/s 143(2) was issued

M/S BANSAL EXTRACTION & EXPORT P LTD,BHOPAL vs. DCIT,CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No. 82/Ind/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit (Central)-1 M/S. Bansal Extraction & बनाम/ Bhopal Exports (P) Ltd., Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aadcb 7521 M

income. But in the present case, the assessee’s claim is to allow depreciation u/s 32 against regular business- income

THE ACIT 1(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S PARAG FANS & COOLING SYSTEMS LTD., DEWAS

In the result appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

depreciation and carry forward if any. 18. We on perusal of record find that computation of income for Assessment Year 2012-13 is not placed on record. The return of income of preceding years from which the business

THE ACIT 1(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S PARAG FANS & COOLING SYSTEMS LTD., DEWAS

In the result appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

depreciation and carry forward if any. 18. We on perusal of record find that computation of income for Assessment Year 2012-13 is not placed on record. The return of income of preceding years from which the business

RAISEN MARKETING P LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ADIT CPC , BGHOPAL

In the result, the present appeal is allowed in so far as it relates\nto adjudication of Ground No

INCOME\nPROFITS AND GAINS FROM BUSINESS AND PROFESSION\nPROFIT BEFORE TAX AS PER PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT\nADD:\nDEPRECIATION DISALLOWED\nDISALLOWED U/S 37\nLESS: ALLOWED DEPRECIATION

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

income chargeable under the head, “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession”. [Emphasis supplied] Thus, the language of section 37(1) is very clear and leaves no room for any doubt or otherwise interpretation. The words “not being expenditure of the nature described in section 30 to 36” mentioned therein are clear enough to demonstrate that any expenditure

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

income chargeable under the head, “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession”. [Emphasis supplied] Thus, the language of section 37(1) is very clear and leaves no room for any doubt or otherwise interpretation. The words “not being expenditure of the nature described in section 30 to 36” mentioned therein are clear enough to demonstrate that any expenditure

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

income chargeable under the head, “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession”. [Emphasis supplied] Thus, the language of section 37(1) is very clear and leaves no room for any doubt or otherwise interpretation. The words “not being expenditure of the nature described in section 30 to 36” mentioned therein are clear enough to demonstrate that any expenditure