ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI SANJAY SHUKLA, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Shri Sanjay Shukla, Acit Central Circle 2, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessment Year:2013-14 Acit Central Circle 2, Shri Sanjay Shukla, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03..2022 आदेश / O R D E R

cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and interest thereon Rs. 4,74,82,575/- 2. Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act Rs. 3,57,623/- 3. Ad hoc disallowance @ 5% of the expenses Rs.21,33,556/- 4. Unexplained agricultural income Rs.6,80,640/- 5. Disallowance of depreciation

SHRI SANJAY SHUKLA ,INDORE vs. ACIT,CENTRAL-CIRLE-2, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Shri Sanjay Shukla, Acit Central Circle 2, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessment Year:2013-14 Acit Central Circle 2, Shri Sanjay Shukla, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03..2022 आदेश / O R D E R

cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and interest thereon Rs. 4,74,82,575/- 2. Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act Rs. 3,57,623/- 3. Ad hoc disallowance @ 5% of the expenses Rs.21,33,556/- 4. Unexplained agricultural income Rs.6,80,640/- 5. Disallowance of depreciation

RAINA GARG,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A), DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Raina Garg, Ito-4(1), Prop. M/S. Garg Trading Bhopal Company, बनाम/ Purana Kabadkhana, Vs. Jumerati, Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Aawpg4732F Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.02.2024

unexplained cash credit) Page 11 of 18 Raina Garg, Bhopal ITA No. 334/Ind/2023 – AY 2015-16 11. From submissions of assessee, following facts emerge: (i) The assessee took loan of Rs. 4,00,000/- on 16.03.2015 through a/c payee cheque drawn on lender’s Current A/c with bank; (ii) The lender is a partnership firm with PAN: AAUFA0411H

GOVIND HARINARAYAN AGRAWAL HUF,INDORE vs. I T O 2(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

credit towards Long Term Capital Gain earned on sale of shares on stock exchange, by holding it as bogus, more particularly when Ld. A.O relied merely on third party information and failed to bring any positive, direct and cogent material on record to substantiate the impugned treatment for making the addition. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances

MANISH GOVIND AGRAWAL HUF,INDORE vs. I T O 2(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

credit towards Long Term Capital Gain earned on sale of shares on stock exchange, by holding it as bogus, more particularly when Ld. A.O relied merely on third party information and failed to bring any positive, direct and cogent material on record to substantiate the impugned treatment for making the addition. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances

SHIV NARAYAN SHARMA,INDORE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

credit towards Long Term Capital Gain earned on sale of shares on stock exchange, by holding it as bogus, more particularly when Ld. A.O relied merely on third party information and failed to bring any positive, direct and cogent material on record to substantiate the impugned treatment for making the addition. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances

PRAYANK JAIN,INDORE vs. ACIT5(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

credit towards Long Term Capital Gain earned on sale of shares on stock exchange, by holding it as bogus, more particularly when Ld. A.O relied merely on third party information and failed to bring any positive, direct and cogent material on record to substantiate the impugned treatment for making the addition. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances

SAPAN SHAH,INDORE vs. ACIT-4(I), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

credit towards Long Term Capital Gain earned on sale of shares on stock exchange, by holding it as bogus, more particularly when Ld. A.O relied merely on third party information and failed to bring any positive, direct and cogent material on record to substantiate the impugned treatment for making the addition. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances

DARSHAN KUMAR PAHWA,INDORE vs. DCIT CIRCLE5(1), INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

credit towards Long Term Capital Gain earned on sale of shares on stock exchange, by holding it as bogus, more particularly when Ld. A.O relied merely on third party information and failed to bring any positive, direct and cogent material on record to substantiate the impugned treatment for making the addition. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances

M/S JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-II, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Dy. Cit, Limited Central-Ii, [Formerly Known As ‘Jay Jyoti Bhopal (India) Pvt. Ltd.’] बनाम/ 26, Col. Biswas Road, Ground Floor, Vs. West Side Flat, Kolkata (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaacj 8822 E Assessee By Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, Ca Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 21.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.01.2024

cash credit u/s 68, is beyond jurisdiction, bad in law, illegal, unjustified, against the principles of natural justice, void ab initio and barred by limitation also. (v) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of ld. AO in making aggregate addition

SATYANARAYAN SHARMA,INDORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, INDORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2013-14

unexplained income from Vyapam scam even though the assessee is having sufficient cash in hand in the books of accounts, we in view of judgment in the case of Malabar Industrial Satyanarayan Sharma /ITANo.426/Ind/2018 Co. (supra) as per which before invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Act Ld. PCIT should have satisfied the twin conditions, namely order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RATLAM, RATLAM vs. SHRI SURESH CHAND JAIN, JHABUA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & Acit 5(1) Shri Suresh Chand Jain Indore 99, Thandla Road, Vs. Meghnagar,Jhabua (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan:Aezpj 2697F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 09.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12 .09.2023

credited and the same was paid in the next year. No efforts of whatsoever has been made by the AO for verification of the creditors. The inability of the AO to verify the confirmations of creditors filed by the appellant is not a sufficient reason for rejecting the confirmations. When the entries stand in the name of third party

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RATLAM vs. SHRI SURESH CHAND JAIN, MEGHNAGAR DIST. JHABUA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & Acit 5(1) Shri Suresh Chand Jain Indore 99, Thandla Road, Vs. Meghnagar,Jhabua (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan:Aezpj 2697F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 09.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12 .09.2023

credited and the same was paid in the next year. No efforts of whatsoever has been made by the AO for verification of the creditors. The inability of the AO to verify the confirmations of creditors filed by the appellant is not a sufficient reason for rejecting the confirmations. When the entries stand in the name of third party

KIRAN KUMAR IKHE,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(2), BHOPAL

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

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

unexplained cash credit. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the addition being wrong requires to be deleted. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance for an amount of 4 ,00,500/- , being 30% of the rent expenses

SHRI ASHISH KOTHARI,DEWAS vs. THE DCIT-1(1), UJJAIN

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

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

unexplained cash credit. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the addition being wrong requires to be deleted. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance for an amount of 4 ,00,500/- , being 30% of the rent expenses

ASHISH KOTHARI,DEWAS vs. THE DCIT-1(1), UJJAIN

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

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

unexplained cash credit. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the addition being wrong requires to be deleted. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance for an amount of 4 ,00,500/- , being 30% of the rent expenses

ITO 4(1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. RSR HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION P LTD, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2013-14 Ito 4(1) Rsr Housing Construction P. Bhopal Ltd. बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Byjpc4571L Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Girish Agrawal & Mis. Nisha Lahoti, Ars Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal At The Instance Of Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Bhopal Dated 31.01.2020 Which Are Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S 263 Of The Income Tax

depreciation thereon. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,63,46,000/- made by AO on account of unexplained expenditure. 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.18,00,000/- made

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

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act\nwithout any evidence on record was wholly unjustified and bad in law hence\ndeleted by Ld. CIT(A) vide para 10.1 & 10.2 at page 27 & 28 of the\nappellate order.\nVI) Additional evidences - Remand Report under Rule 46A\nWe submit that in response to notices u/s 142(1) of the Act, admittedly