SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

reopened only on the issue of assessment of capital gain on sale of agricultural land, the details of which are given by the AO as under: “4.1. In the instant case during the course of assessment proceedings it is found that during FY 2011-12 relevant to A.Y 2012-13 assessee has sold his immovable property situated at Survey No.310/1

HIMANSHU BOTADEARA HUF,INDORE vs. THE ITO 4(3), INDORE

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assesse are

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

house property, income from business or profession, income from capital gain and income from other sources. There is no dispute that the assessee is doing trading in the shares through its Demat account the copies of which were filed by the Ld. Counsel of the assesse as directed by the bench. On going through the details of Demat account with

HIMANSHU BOTADEARA HUF,INDORE vs. THE ITO 4(3), INDORE

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assesse are

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

house property, income from business or profession, income from capital gain and income from other sources. There is no dispute that the assessee is doing trading in the shares through its Demat account the copies of which were filed by the Ld. Counsel of the assesse as directed by the bench. On going through the details of Demat account with

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. SHRI RITESH JAIN, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

reopening for A. Y. 200809 on identical grounds as done in earlier Assessment Year namely A. Y. 200708 which is pending in this Court and ad interim relief has also been granted, restraining the revenue from proceeding with the assessment for A. Y. 200708. The passing of an order on 19 December 2013 by the Assessing Officer in undue haste

ANIL FIROJIYA,BHAKT NAGAR UJJAIN vs. DY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYKAR BHAWAN

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Anil Firojiya, Dy. Commissioner Of 6, Bhakt Nagar, Income-Tax, बनाम/ Dashera Maidan, Assessment Unit, Vs. Ujjain New Delhi (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaipf7302A Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.07.2024

house was carried out after F.Y. 2012-13. From the information uploaded in Insight portal by the DDIT-II, Indore, it had been emerged out that the payment to the tune of Rs. 10,29,672/- was borne by the appellant for the FY 2017-18 relevant to assessment year 2018-19 towards construction of the said property under consideration

SHRI KHALID AMAN,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Khalid Aman, Pr. Cit-2 Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aarpa 4443 L Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 17.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2023

reopened under section 148 on the point of stamp valuation of property which was considered by assessing officer and such that the order of assessment does not suffer any illegality. 4. The Ld. Pr. CIT went wrong in invoking the provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the income tax act. The Pr. CIT failed to note that

JAYA JUNEJA,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

properties. Accordingly, the assessment was completed under section 147 of the Act assessing the total income at ₹88,93,186/- as against the returned income of ₹8,95,170/- filed by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in which the assessee raised multiple grounds. During the appellate proceedings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI NEERAJ MANDLOI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

property. 41. In this case additions have been made on the same set of loose papers on which the assessments have been made in the case of ShRaghav Chandra and ShNarottam Mishra on the same ground that the appellant has received certain payments from Nagarjun Construction Co. Ltd. and Simplex Infrastructure Ltd. In the appellant proceedings, the additions in both

SHRI PANKAJ VYAS,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO -1 (2) , BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanipankaj Vyas Ito-1(2) House No.20, Geet Gunglows, Bhopal Phase-5, Narela Shankari Vs. Bhopal

House No.20, Geet Gunglows, Bhopal Phase-5, Narela Shankari Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: ABTPV 2610H Assessee by Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Revenue by Shri Harshit Bari, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 31.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: This appeal by the assesse is directed against the order dated

SMT NAYANA JAYESH PATEL ,INDORE vs. ACIT ( OSD ) , INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninayana Jayesh Patel Pr. Cit 29/5, South Tukoganj Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afypp 2075H Assessee By Shri Sudhir Padliya, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 01.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02 .08.2023

reopened by the AO and the assessee was asked vide notice dated 12.10.2018 u/s 142(1) to submit copy of purchase deed and sale deed of the property sold during the financial year 2011-12 and also submitted copies of all agreement to sale and purchase of property executed during the year under consideration. The relevant query in para

DCIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL vs. SHAILENDRA SHARMA, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment

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

property already took place on 07.01.2011. The seized document is entirely silent about the 9 IT(SS) No.30 & 31/Ind/2023 ITA (SS) No.305/Ind/2023 Shailendra Sharma transaction whether it is a payment or receipt. The addition made by the A.O in respect of other notings in the seized document has been deleted by the CIT(A) in para No. 3.6.2 as under

SMT MANORAMA SINGHAL,INDORE vs. ITO-3(2), INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Years: 2013-14

house property and other sources. Return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 filed on 30.07.2013 declaring income of Rs.8,80,350/-. Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 22.09.2017, based on the information received on the basis of search conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 21.09.2012 at Garha Group and Apollo Group, Indore, alleging that ‘on-money

HARPREET KAUR,BHOPAL vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 5(2), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

house may not be given on this land.\nThe purchaser also stated to have made a verbal communication to\nassessee that “he shall only pay consideration of the said land as much\nvalue as would be adopted by the State government authority at the\ntime of making registry”. However, the purchaser did not give any\nevidence whatsoever

RAMKUNWAR PATIDAR,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2 (4), BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Ramkunwar Patidar, Income-Tax Officer, Village Salliya, 2(4), बनाम/ Post Bawadia Kalan, Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Blxpp4909C Assessee By Shri S.S.Solanki, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22.02.2024

property was made before the date of registry and also that the appellant has purchased the house within the period specified of 2 years by the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellant has acted bona fide by investing capital gains amount in purchase of house within the period specified

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

reopened under section 143(3)/148 and has accepted the income of the firm and also genuineness of the activities. Therefore, no addition is warranted in the case of the assessee, since the income was already taxed in the hands of the firm, and taxing again in the hands of the assessee amount to double taxation. He accordingly prayed

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

reopened under section 143(3)/148 and has accepted the income of the firm and also genuineness of the activities. Therefore, no addition is warranted in the case of the assessee, since the income was already taxed in the hands of the firm, and taxing again in the hands of the assessee amount to double taxation. He accordingly prayed

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

reopened under section 143(3)/148 and has accepted the income of the firm and also genuineness of the activities. Therefore, no addition is warranted in the case of the assessee, since the income was already taxed in the hands of the firm, and taxing again in the hands of the assessee amount to double taxation. He accordingly prayed

KAMAL PANJWANI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 3 (1), INDORE

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

property (Jangam Milkiyat) and in assessment year 1990-91 Rs. One lakh has been surrendered by Shri N.P. Panjwani on account of the investment in household goods. Further Rs. 50,000/- has been surrendered in assessment year 1992-93 on account of cash recovered at the time of search and in this year Rs. 2,00,000/- has been surrendered