THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘A.Y.’) 2011-12 with the following grounds: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘A.Y.’) 2011-12 with the following grounds: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘A.Y.’) 2011-12 with the following grounds: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO -1 (5), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Essargee Construction Ito 1(5) Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal Vs. A-10, Mezenine Floor Essarjee House Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaace 8852F Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.08.2023

3) provides an under: "Where the assessee inours any expenditure in respect of which payment is made, after such date (not being later than the 31st day of March, 1965) as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette, in a sum exceeding ten thousand rupees otherwise than by a crossed cheque

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

50,000/- plus Rs.52,000). Aggrieved by the disallowance made by the AO, the assessee went in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 33. Before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee submitted that during the regular assessment framed under section 143(3

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

50,000/- plus Rs.52,000). Aggrieved by the disallowance made by the AO, the assessee went in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 33. Before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee submitted that during the regular assessment framed under section 143(3

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

50,000/- plus Rs.52,000). Aggrieved by the disallowance made by the AO, the assessee went in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 33. Before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee submitted that during the regular assessment framed under section 143(3

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAVI ARORA, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2011-12 Dcit-5(1), Shri Ravi Arora, Indore 1007, Khatiwala Tank, बनाम/ 236, Indraprasth Tower, 6, M.G. Road, Vs. Indore. (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Agdpa8921H Assessee By Shri Yash Kukreja, Ca & Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Adv & Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

section 40A(3) of the I. T. Act.” 2. Heard the learned Representatives of both sides at length and case- records perused. 3. Brief facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee- individual submitted his return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 17,29,650/- which was subjected to scrutiny assessment u/s 143(2). Finally

M/S. SHEETU EDUCATIONAL SERVICES P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2005-06 to 2010-11 are partly allowed as per our

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

disallowed but in no case, the same is taxable u/s 23 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee also used its building premises for running of the coaching classes. The assessee had claimed depreciation on the building which was used by it for the purpose of its business and also leased out as per term agreed by the assessee company

M/S SHEETU EDUCATIONAL SERVICE PVT LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2005-06 to 2010-11 are partly allowed as per our

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

disallowed but in no case, the same is taxable u/s 23 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee also used its building premises for running of the coaching classes. The assessee had claimed depreciation on the building which was used by it for the purpose of its business and also leased out as per term agreed by the assessee company

M/S. SHEETU EDUCATIONAL SERVICES P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2005-06 to 2010-11 are partly allowed as per our

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

disallowed but in no case, the same is taxable u/s 23 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee also used its building premises for running of the coaching classes. The assessee had claimed depreciation on the building which was used by it for the purpose of its business and also leased out as per term agreed by the assessee company

M/S. SHEETU EDUCATIONAL SERVICES P LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 5(1) RANGE-5, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2005-06 to 2010-11 are partly allowed as per our

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

disallowed but in no case, the same is taxable u/s 23 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee also used its building premises for running of the coaching classes. The assessee had claimed depreciation on the building which was used by it for the purpose of its business and also leased out as per term agreed by the assessee company

M/S SHEETU EDUCATIONAL SERVICE PVT LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2005-06 to 2010-11 are partly allowed as per our

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

disallowed but in no case, the same is taxable u/s 23 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee also used its building premises for running of the coaching classes. The assessee had claimed depreciation on the building which was used by it for the purpose of its business and also leased out as per term agreed by the assessee company

THE ACIT 3(2), INDORE vs. M/S. SIMRAN DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ito-3(2), M/S. Simran Developers Indore 402, Mark Building, बनाम/ Saket Square, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Ackfs 1946 B Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By None Date Of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

50,51,327/- after making additions on three counts, viz. (i) disallowance of Rs. 23,26,323/- out of expenses; (ii) difference of Rs. 96,30,181/- in valuation of cost of goods sold/closing stock; and (iii) disallowance of Rs. 40,00,000/- u/s 40A(3). Being aggrieved, the assessee went in first-appeal and succeeded partly. Now, the revenue

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

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

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

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

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT-1 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

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

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

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

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale