SHRI SAURABH KALANI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in both the assessment years are allowed

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

disallowance u/s 14A. Further, the ld. CIT(A) levied the penalty suo motu and without appreciating that no penalty proceedings

SHRI MANISH KALANI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in both the assessment years are allowed

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

disallowance u/s 14A. Further, the ld. CIT(A) levied the penalty suo motu and without appreciating that no penalty proceedings

SMT. PADMA KALANI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the

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

disallowance u/s 14A. Further, the ld. CIT(A) levied the penalty suo motu and without appreciating that no penalty proceedings

M/S. STI (INDIA) LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT-5(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty on disallowance of interest of Rs.14,39,191/- in spite of the fact that the AO has made a disallowance

THE ACIT -3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. MAYA SPINNERS LTD., INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 1996-97

disallowing the exemption, penalty cannot be imposed. The penalty levied stands set aside.” The situation in the present case is still

M/S. NARMADA MALWA GRAMIN BANK,INDORE vs. THE ACIT-3(1), INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2008-09 Acit- 3(1) M/S. Narmada Malwa Gramin Indore Bank, बनाम/ 201, Arcade Silver, 56 Shops, New Vs. Palasia, Indore (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaccn2847F Assessment Year: 2008-09

penalty on the alleged disallowance wherein the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the impugned penalty observing as follows: “On the first

THE ACIT-3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. NARMADA MALWA GRAMIN BANK, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2008-09 Acit- 3(1) M/S. Narmada Malwa Gramin Indore Bank, बनाम/ 201, Arcade Silver, 56 Shops, New Vs. Palasia, Indore (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaccn2847F Assessment Year: 2008-09

penalty on the alleged disallowance wherein the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the impugned penalty observing as follows: “On the first

ABDUL RAHMAN USMANI,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A0-II, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

penalty should not be levied on adhoc disallowance. Ld. A.O was not satisfied and he levied the penalty at Rs.5

CIT-2, BHOPAL vs. KRASHAK SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, RAISEN

In the result, both the appeals of revenue in case of Sewa

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Raisen Bharkacha Vs. (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aafts5908N Assessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Krashak Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Maryadit, Bhaisaya Badi Vs. Raisen (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaak9049E

penalty has been levied on the additions relating to disallowance of interest and disallowance of provisions for bad and doubtful

CIT-2, BHOPAL vs. SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, RAISEN

In the result, both the appeals of revenue in case of Sewa

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Raisen Bharkacha Vs. (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aafts5908N Assessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Krashak Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Maryadit, Bhaisaya Badi Vs. Raisen (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaak9049E

penalty has been levied on the additions relating to disallowance of interest and disallowance of provisions for bad and doubtful

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S. ARIHANT CAPITAL MARKETS LTD., INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of

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

disallowance of penalty and Rs.15,508/- on account of disallowance of prior period expenses without appreciating the facts and evidences

DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. M P STATE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

disallowance of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in assessment-order and thereafter imposed penalty of Rs. 98,00,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) by penalty

SHRI SHASHAM KOTHARI,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT-1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10

disallowance. 4. Subsequently penalty proceedings were also initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the alleged disallowance of labour

SHRI SHASHAM KOTHARI,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10

disallowance. 4. Subsequently penalty proceedings were also initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the alleged disallowance of labour

SWASTIKA COMMODITIES PVT. LIMITED,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Swastika Commodities Acit, Pvt. Limitted बनाम/ 48, Jaora Compound, Circle-5(1), Indore Vs. M.Y.H. Road, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. Aaccs3050K Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Yogeesh Mishra Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal Of Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Ii, Indore, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Dated 01.05.2018 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income

penalty imposed by NCDEX and MCX of Rs.23,000/- This ground of appeal is with regard to disallowance of penalty

M/S. KRISHNA SOYA PRODUCTS PVT. LTD,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), INDORE

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

disallowance does not mean that the penalty has to be imposed automatically. It is trite law that penalty proceedings are distinct

KAMAL SHADIJA,INDORE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX EPARTMENT, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2020-21 Kamal Shadija Assessment Unit 156, Palsikar Colony, Income Tax Department बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Azsps4490H Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

disallowance and ultimately imposed penalty also. The assessee is only contesting penalty imposed by AO, he has not filed any appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. M P STATE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

disallowance of Rs.2,00,00,000/- in assessment-order and thereafter imposed penalty of Rs.98,00,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) by penalty

RAMA GARG,SEHORE vs. DCIT-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Rama Garg, Dcit-3(1), Gadhi Chok, Bhopal Chota Bazar, Vs. Nasrullaganj, Sehore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abcpg1140J Assessee By Shri R.K. Mangal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.06.2024

penalty levied on power expenses of Rs.7,99,254/- on the basis of the disallowance of expenses confirmed by the Hon. ITAT