ACIT(CENTRAL)-1,, INDORE vs. SHRI RAJUL BHARGAVA, INDORE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

153A for AYs 2008-09 to 2014-15 since the entire material was already available with the LD. AO at the time of regular assessment proceedings and no new material came to the possession, therefore, this is a clear case of change of opinion. From the questionnaire dated 15.01.2016 issued during the course of regular assessment proceedings, copy of which

ACIT(CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI RAUNAK MARU, INDORE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

153A for AYs 2008-09 to 2014-15 since the entire material was already available with the LD. AO at the time of regular assessment proceedings and no new material came to the possession, therefore, this is a clear case of change of opinion. From the questionnaire dated 15.01.2016 issued during the course of regular assessment proceedings, copy of which

MANISH CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of claim of long term capital gain on sale of listed shares amounting to Rs. 77,57,559/- is the issue before us. The said claim of the assessee has been rejected by both the parties below and hence the appeal before us. 3. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have also

MANISH CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of claim of long term capital gain on sale of listed shares amounting to Rs. 77,57,559/- is the issue before us. The said claim of the assessee has been rejected by both the parties below and hence the appeal before us. 3. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have also

ASHISH CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of claim of long term capital gain on sale of listed shares amounting to Rs. 77,57,559/- is the issue before us. The said claim of the assessee has been rejected by both the parties below and hence the appeal before us. 3. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have also

PAWAN KUMAR CHHAPARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of claim of long term capital gain on sale of listed shares amounting to Rs. 77,57,559/- is the issue before us. The said claim of the assessee has been rejected by both the parties below and hence the appeal before us. 3. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have also

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 153A. Therefore, since the loans taken were found to be genuine, disallowance of interest on such loans was not valid

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 153A. Therefore, since the loans taken were found to be genuine, disallowance of interest on such loans was not valid

JCIT(OSD),-2(1),INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 153A. Therefore, since the loans taken were found to be genuine, disallowance of interest on such loans was not valid

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 made of Rs.28345/- under section 14A of Income Tax Act. 6. Similarly, in the case of Shri Manish Kalani, who is also an individual and filed the return of income on 06.12.2010 in response to proceedings initiated under section 153A

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 made of Rs.28345/- under section 14A of Income Tax Act. 6. Similarly, in the case of Shri Manish Kalani, who is also an individual and filed the return of income on 06.12.2010 in response to proceedings initiated under section 153A

M/S. AVALANCHE REALITY PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2008-09

disallowance of Rs.15,16,961/- by invoking the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal. Thereby the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition of Rs.6,89,26,888/- and deleted the addition of Rs.16

ANAND PRAKASH KAMDAR,BHOPAL vs. ACIT-1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2010-11 Anand Prakash Kamdar Acit-1(1) E-4/188, Bhopal बनाम/ Arera Colony, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Afopk0788A Assesseeby S/Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv.& Gagan Tiwari Adv. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2023

153A read with section 143(3). While completing assessment, the Ld. AO computed taxable gain at Rs. 37,38,356/- and disallowed

SHRI M A KHAN,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) It(Ss)A Nos.37 To 42/Ind/2015 & Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2010-11 Late M.A. Khan Acit 3(1) (Through L/H Nazhat Bhopal Parveen Khan) बनाम/ B-90, Housing Board, Vs. Kohefiza, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan:Aewpk 3620 C Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Shri Vijay Bansal, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

section 153A. This proposition has been clearly upheld by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Gahoi Dal & Oil Mills (supra), which is a decision binding upon this Bench of ITAT working at Indore. At this stage, we would also like to add that in their later decision in the case of Pr. CIT and ors. Vs. Meeta

THE ACIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. M.C.S. TRADING COM. PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result the appeals of the revenue for Assessment Year

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

153A as invalid in absence of incriminating documents whereas, as per the Income Tax Act and in the light of various case laws the assessment proceeding cannot be invalid when a search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out and warrant of authorization was issued and executed against the assessee.” Assessee’s C.O. No. 38/Ind/2016, Assessment Year

SHRI RAMESH CHAND RAI,JHANSI vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

disallowance of expenses was not made by passing order under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) and thus made

SHRI RAMESH CHAND RAI,JHANSI vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

disallowance of expenses was not made by passing order under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) and thus made

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

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

disallowance of interest on the unsecured loans, the assessee submitted that such interest was claimed by the assessee on the various unsecured loans taken by it from the aforesaid companies, and for which the AO has invoked the provisions of section 68 of the Act. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the loans from the subject companies were genuinely