RAJENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Rajendra Kumar Dcit/Acit-2(1), Gupta, Bhopal B-72, Mansarovar, बनाम/ Shahpura, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaypg6045M Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.04.2024

demonetization period. Consequently, we uphold the addition made by AO. 11. To sum up, the issue of capital contribution of Rs. 22,02,000/- and receipt of Rs. 4,99,998/- from M/s Supermax are remanded back to AO for Page 10 of 15 Shri Rajendra Kumar Gupta, Bhopal ITA No. 498/Ind/2023 – AY 2017-18 adjudication afresh. The additions

THE DCIT CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SHRI ASHISH NIGAM, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit Central-1 Ashish Nigam Indore 15, Bada Sarafa Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Ablpn6361M Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ar Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2024

property transaction which, by its very nature, are received early and on completion of such transaction? c) It amounts to accepting an untenable position that a huge cash amount was kept by assessee as idle while various bank transactions were carried out during the period for more than three years and cash was deposited during demonetization period only

SUDHA LUHADIA,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE ITO - 4(5), INDORE, INDORE, M.P.

In the result, the impugned order is upheld

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisudha Luhadia, Indore The Ito-4(5), बनाम/ C/O S.V. Agrawal & Indore Vs. Associates, 25, Joy Builders Colony, Near Rafael Tower, Old Palasia, Indore (Mp) (Pan: Abapl5445M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

house property. Basis page 7 it was submitted that income from stitching was Rs.203550, income from embroidery was Rs.1,55,500/- and income from pressing was Rs.90950, the aggregates of which comes to Rs. 4,50,000/- (credit not given). It Sudha Luhadia ITANo.546/Ind/2025 was submitted that the ROI was filed late. In respect of income from rent is concerned

KUSUMLATA GARG,INDORE vs. DCIT ACIT 3 (1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

house property to the tune of Rs.\n56,60,390/- as Gross Rent. However, on perusal of 26AS consolidated\nincome received in that category is shown as Rs.61,99,560/- and TDS were\ndeducted on each. The appellant in this regard has stated that the amount of\nRs.6,39,120/- due as a rent has not been received from

NEMICHAND JAIN,KALANI NAGAR, INDORE vs. ITO 4(1), AAYAKAR BHAWAN

The appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2017-18 Nemichand Jain Ito 4(1) 2, Airport Road, Indore बनाम/ Kalani Nagar Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abjpj8164A Assessee By Shri Pankaj Mogra, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2025

demonetization period even when it was explained by the appellant that amount of Rs.6,50,000/- in Punjab National Bank and Rs.5,46,000/- in HDFC Bank Ltd. was deposited in the Joint Accounts of appellant with her wife out of their past years savings and Rs 2,20,000/- was deposited in Bank of Baroda even when the said

SEWA SAHKARI SAMMITTEE MARYADIT,BEED, MUNDI KHANDWA vs. PCIT-1, INDORE

In the result, appeal by the assesse is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisewa Sahkari Sammittee Pr. Cit-2 Maryadit Beed Indore Vs. Beed Mundi Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaufs0703N Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

demonetization. The assessee has contended that similar deposits were made in the earlier years also before the undersigned. However, no such details of earlier years were furnished by the assessee nor were called by the AO. Most notably, it is seen that during the course of assessment proceeding, the AO had called for all the bank statements of the assessee

GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

demonetized currency notes of Rs.500 and 1,000.\nActing thereon, the statements of all three persons (including assessee) were\nrecorded u/s 131 on 14.11.2016 wherein all of them (including assessee)\nadmitted that the entire cash belonged to assessee. Accordingly, a requisition\ndated 14.11.2016 u/s 132A was issued. The statements of assessee were again\nrecorded u/s 132(4) on the very