SHREE RAJENDRA SURI SAH SAKH SANTHA MYD,RAJGARH, DHAR vs. THE ITO, DHAR, DHAR

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

depreciation expenses of Rs.11,97,909/- claimed in the Profit and Loss account under section 38(2) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 in view of leakage and personal utilization of vehicle without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submissions made before him\n\n6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SCIENCE FORUM FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH,GRAM MINDIA, SANVER ROAD vs. CIT(A), UJJAIN

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2017-18

4 of 9 Science Forum for Rural Development & Research ITA No. 340/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 excess of Income over expenditure Takshshila Junior College is Rs. 14,69,899/- The total excess of Income Expenditure is Rs. 14,85,696/-. The assessee is registered u/s 12A of the Tax act and is also registered under section 10(23C)(vi). The assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. PURUSHOTTAM GUPTA, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed and\n\"impugned order” is set aside

253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The Revenue is aggrieved\nby the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/\n1060613547(1) dated 07.02.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250\nof the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned\norder\". The relevant Assessment Year

SHREE TEKCHANDJI MAHARAJ TRUST,UJJAIN vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, UJJAIN

253 of\nthe income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act\nfor the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of a\nsecond Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order\nbearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1076353113\n(1) dated 21.05.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the\nAct, which is herein after referred

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

253 of the income tax Act 1961, [herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity]. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:- ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075866312(1) dated 29.04.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned order”. The Relevant Assessment year

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act') against the order issued under section 263 of the Act by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Bhopal (here-in-after referred to as 'Ld. PCIT') on the following grounds which are independent and without prejudice to each other: On the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S. BRIDGESTONE INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. THE ACIT NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. Acit (Nfac) Plot No.A-43, Phase-Ii, Delhi Midc Chakan, Village Vs. Sawardari, Taluka Khed, Pune (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcb 2304 E Assessee By Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 23.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2023

depreciation of INR 58,48,669) in respect of the subsidies received from Government of Madhya Pradesh under the Industrial Promotion Policy, 2004 by treating the same as revenue receipt. Prayer: The Appellant prays that the addition made by Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP be deleted and the Ld. AO be directed to treat the amount of INR 4

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. MARAL OVERSEAS LTD, KHARGONE

In the result, the “Impugned

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshideputy Commissioner Of Maral Overseas Ltd. बनाम/ Income Tax- 4(1) Maral Srovar, V & Po, Vs. Indore Khalbujurg, Kasrawad, Khargone, Bhopal (Pan: Aaccm0230B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satyajeet Goyal, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2026

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this Tribunal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-1045/21-22 dated 22.07.2022 [DR NO.-31/10 D.No.-104] passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred

ACIT-1(1), INDORE vs. KRITI NUTRIENTS LIMITED, INDORE

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The Revenue is aggrieved by\norder bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1068409849(1)\ndated 06.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A), u/s 250 of the Act which\nis hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The relevant\nKriti Nutrients Ltd.\nITA No. 780/Ind/2024\nA.Y

M/S RADHISHWARI DEVLOPERS P LTD,INDORE vs. PR CIT -2 INDORE, INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. (Now Known As R.C. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. ) Indore : Appellant Pan :Aafcr1916A V/S Pr. Cito-2 : Respondent Indore Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema Sr. Adv. With Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2021

depreciation at Rs.1,53,066/- to be carry forward for set up in subsequent years. 3. After passing of the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act, Ld. Pr. CIT examined the assessment records and documents filed by the assessee and notice that the M/s. Radheshwari Developers Pvt. Ltd. assessment order is prima facie, erroneous and prejudicial

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. ODDIVILLE FOODS AND FROZEN, INDORE

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed\nand the order of the Ld

253/-.\nAccordingly, these grounds of appeal no.1 to 3 are hereby allowed.\nGround No.4\nAssessee has raised this ground as an alternative, in case deduction\nu/s.35AD has been disallowed, then depreciation u/s.32 should be allowed.\nPage 7 of 16\nOddiville Foods and Frozen\nITA No. 427/Ind/2025 – AY 2018-19\nBut since in this case deduction u/s.35AD has been allowed hence