M/S NMI INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ITO-4(1), INDORE

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11 M/S. Nmi Industries Pvt. Ito-4(1) Ltd, Vs. Indore 314 Bhagirathpura, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aabcn9571B Assessment Year 2010-2011

depreciation which have been adopted for preparing such accounts including 76e[statement of profit and loss] for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year. Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this section, "book profit" means the 77[profit] as shown in the 76e[statement of profit and loss] for the relevant previous

DILIP BUILDCON LTD ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Acit Central-1 Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent /Revenue) Pan: Aaccd 6124 B Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.10.2022

section 32(1)(iia) would be permissible to the extent allowed as depreciation.” 25.12. In light of the above decision we find that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of RMC. Now we need to consider as to which plant and machinery would be eligible for additional depreciation and investment allowance. In this regard, it is necessary

M/S. FLEXITUFF INTERNATIONAL LTD.,DHAR vs. THE PR.CIT-1, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13 M/S. Flexituff International Pr. Commissioner Of Ltd, Vs. Income Tax-1, C-41-50, Sez, Sector-3, Indore Pithampur, Dist. Dhar (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan Aaacn5986H Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit Assessee By Shri Manjit Sachdeva & Avinash Gaur, Advocates Date Of Hearing 26.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 14.05.2019 O R D E R

section 32. Hence, the excess depreciation of Rs.38,98,361/- requires to be added”. 7. In the above show cause notices issued u/s 263 of the Act Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has made following three observations; (1) That the assessee should have first set off the aggregate of loss of current years and brought forward losses against

THE DCIT, 5(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. SANWARIA AGRO OILS LTD., BHOPAL

In the result Ground No.2 of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11

depreciation, there was no positive profit in the current year for allowing deduction u/s 80IA of the Act, because as per Section 80IA(5) of the Act, the wind power generation unit were to be considered as the only source of income of the appellant. On the other hand, the contention of the A.R of the appellant was that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), INDORE vs. M/S AGRAWAL COAL CORP. PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

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

depreciation. The claim of deduction u/s Agrawal Coal Corporation Pvt. Ltd ITA No.801 to 803/Ind/2018, ITA No.778/Ind/2018 & CO Nos.23 &24/Ind/2019 80IB in respect of the two eligible units viz. 'Spandhana' and 'Samruddhi' of Rs.2,23,22,237/- is obviously less than the gross total income. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer as well as the Id. CIT(A) erred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, INDORE vs. M/S AGRAWAL COAL CORP. PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

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

depreciation. The claim of deduction u/s Agrawal Coal Corporation Pvt. Ltd ITA No.801 to 803/Ind/2018, ITA No.778/Ind/2018 & CO Nos.23 &24/Ind/2019 80IB in respect of the two eligible units viz. 'Spandhana' and 'Samruddhi' of Rs.2,23,22,237/- is obviously less than the gross total income. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer as well as the Id. CIT(A) erred

DCIT !(1) INDORE, INDORE vs. AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION (P) LTD., INDORE, INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

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

depreciation. The claim of deduction u/s Agrawal Coal Corporation Pvt. Ltd ITA No.801 to 803/Ind/2018, ITA No.778/Ind/2018 & CO Nos.23 &24/Ind/2019 80IB in respect of the two eligible units viz. 'Spandhana' and 'Samruddhi' of Rs.2,23,22,237/- is obviously less than the gross total income. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer as well as the Id. CIT(A) erred

M/S AGRAWAL COAL CORP. PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

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

depreciation. The claim of deduction u/s Agrawal Coal Corporation Pvt. Ltd ITA No.801 to 803/Ind/2018, ITA No.778/Ind/2018 & CO Nos.23 &24/Ind/2019 80IB in respect of the two eligible units viz. 'Spandhana' and 'Samruddhi' of Rs.2,23,22,237/- is obviously less than the gross total income. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer as well as the Id. CIT(A) erred

ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), UJJAIN vs. A ONE ENCLAVE, UJJAIN

In the result, grounds taken by Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1(1), V/S M/S. A One Enclave, Ujjain 3687/1, Hariphatak Road, Ujjain

section 71 of the Income tax act. The appellant is not having other source of income and the excess income declared during the course of survey is nothing but income arising from business of the appellant firm. There is no income then there could have not been investment and as the appellant firm has no other source of income

DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S MAA UMIYA AGRITECH PVT. LTD. , INDORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit 1(1) M/S. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn8230F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2023

depreciation has been filed. iv) This office has called for Books of account and it was observed that ledger was not supported with complete bills. Hence rejection of books of account during the course of assessment proceedings by invoking provision to Section 145(3) are in order. v) Further on examination of books of account it was found dis under

THE ACIT-CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI YOGESH KUMAR HOTWANI, MANDSAUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 153A, it was found that the assessee has offered Rs. 77,93,500/- as additional income in his return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 to 2012-13 as against undisclosed income of Rs. 3 crores admitted by Shri Shiv Kumar Hotwani on behalf of the assessee. It was explained to the AO vide letter dated

SHRI YOGESH HOTWANI,MANDSAUR vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 153A, it was found that the assessee has offered Rs. 77,93,500/- as additional income in his return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 to 2012-13 as against undisclosed income of Rs. 3 crores admitted by Shri Shiv Kumar Hotwani on behalf of the assessee. It was explained to the AO vide letter dated

THE DCIT-CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. KALYAN TOLL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., INDORE

In the result all the grounds raised by Revenue in the case of

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

depreciation forgone and Rs.1,03,87,500/- on account of expenses incurred for share capital and Rs.28,90,450/- on account of loose papers. The income so offered by the assessee U/S 132(4) was also offered in the return filed in response to notice issued u/s 153A and due taxes were also paid before filing the return of income

THE DCIT (CENTRAL), INDORE vs. M/S KETI CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) LTD. , INDORE

In the result all the grounds raised by Revenue in the case of

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

depreciation forgone and Rs.1,03,87,500/- on account of expenses incurred for share capital and Rs.28,90,450/- on account of loose papers. The income so offered by the assessee U/S 132(4) was also offered in the return filed in response to notice issued u/s 153A and due taxes were also paid before filing the return of income

BAL BHAVAN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. DCIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed as mentioned above

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Bal Bhavan School, Dcit (Exemption), 1, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaaab3678G Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.06.2024

115-119 of Paper-Book. Drawing our attention to Para 3.2.2 and 3.2.4 of order, Ld. AR showed that in subsequent AY 2020-21, the assessee paid much higher rent of Rs. 53.77 lacs constituting about 0.82% of the market value and the AO has accepted the same as reasonable in the light of very same decision of The Sardar

M/S. BHANDARI HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Bhandari Hospital & Pr. Cit-(I) Research Centre, Gf-21 & Indore बनाम/ 22, Opp. Meghdoot Garden, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aadfb8151A

115 was carried out. D. The assessee has claimed to have realized the Hundi loans of Rs. 10,43,41,885/- in September to November 2011 and then given the funds to Geetanjali Hospital of Rs 8 Crores in February/ March 2012 and claimed deduction u/s 35 AC of IT Act. The A,O. has. not examined as to whether

DILIP BUILDCON LTD.,BHOPAL vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

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

section ( 4). In order to avail this special development oriented tax incentive an enterprise carrying on business has to engage in, namely: 48 M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or (iii) developing, operating and maintaining any infrastructure facility which fulfils specified conditions. What is recognized as 'infrastructure facility' is also explained

SHRI DILIP BUILDCON LTD,BHOPAL vs. DCIT CENTRAL -1, BHOPAL

In the result, revenue’s appeal for A

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

section ( 4). In order to avail this special development oriented tax incentive an enterprise carrying on business has to engage in, namely: 48 M/s. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. ITA No.782/ind/2018 & others (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or (iii) developing, operating and maintaining any infrastructure facility which fulfils specified conditions. What is recognized as 'infrastructure facility' is also explained