M/S KETI SANGHAM INFRASTRUTURE (I) LIMITED,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

d) Existence of conditions stipulated in section Keti Sangam, etc. ITA Nos. 516/2017, 603/Ind/2016 etc. 271(1)(c) is a sine qua non for initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271. (e) The existence of such conditions should be discernible from the assessment order or the order of the appellate authority or the revisional authority. (f) Even if there

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

D E R PER MANISH BORAD The above captioned appeals filed at the instance of the Revenue pertaining to Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2008-09 in the case of M/s. Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd & M/s. Keti Construction (India) Ltd respectively are directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 (in short ‘Ld.CIT(A)’], Bhopal evenly

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

D E R PER MANISH BORAD The above captioned appeals filed at the instance of the Revenue pertaining to Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2008-09 in the case of M/s. Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd & M/s. Keti Construction (India) Ltd respectively are directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 (in short ‘Ld.CIT(A)’], Bhopal evenly

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated

PREM CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: This appeal of Assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2005-06 is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-II, Indore, (in short ‘CIT(A)’), dated 18.10.2016 which is arising out of the order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961(hereinafter called as the ‘Act’) framed

SHRI VARAD MEHTA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year 2008-09 Shri Varad Mehta, Dcit 1(1), B-4/301, Paras City, Vs. Bhopal Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aflpm6733Q Revenue By Shri Rajeeb Jain, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri Girish Agrawal,Ca Date Of Hearing 27.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 06.12.2018 O R D E R

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above captioned appeal is filed at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09 and is directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I (in short ‘Ld.CIT(A)’], Bhopal dated 21.03.2016 which is arising out of the order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

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

D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by undermentioned appeal-orders passed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) [“CIT(A)”], the assessee and revenue both have filed the captioned cross-appeals for different assessment-years [“AY”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders passed by Page 1 of 29 STI India Ltd. ITA Nos.11, 850, 12, 13/Ind/2019

DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S KALYAN TOLL HIGHWAY PVT.LTD, INDORE

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Dcit(Central)-2 M/S. Kalyan Toll Highway Pvt. Ltd. Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No. Aadck9401F Appellant By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 21.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M:

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2013-14 is directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) (in short ‘Ld. CIT], Bhopal dated 07.11.2019 which are arising out of the penalty order passed M/s. Kalyan toll Highways Pvt. Ltd. ITANo.85/Ind/2020 u/s 271