SMT SADHNA VOHRA,BHOPAL vs. ITO 1(3), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 153C of the Act was not met in the case of the two Assessees.” 11. In the present case, search was carried out at the third party’s premises where from the document related to sale by the assessee were recovered but the A.O. has made addition in respect of the land purchased by the assessee. Admittedly, the document

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

SHANKAR SEWANI,NEW MARKET vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, AAYKAR BHAWAN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Shankar Sewani, Dcit-1(1), 10 Kala Niketan, Bhopal New Market, Vs. T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adkps6959H Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.07.2024 O R D E R

house) for Rs.1,35,00,000/-. The assessee has submitted copy of registered deed of sale of property and purchase of property. The property was jointly purchased in FY 200-04 for a consideration of Rs.35,00,000/-. The reply of the AR has been considered. The assessee has duly offered the capital gain on the aforesaid property

THE DCIT CENTRAL-(1), INDORE vs. M/S AYUSH AJAY CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. , INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyanii.T(Ss).A. Nos.14 To 16/Ind/2018 (Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2009-10)

153C r.w.s. 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for A.Ys. 2007-08 to 2009-10 respectively. In IT(SS)A No. 141/Ind/2019 the appeal preferred by the Revenue are directed against the order dated 26.04.2019 passed by the CIT(A)-3, Bhopal (M.P.) arising out of the assessment order passed

DY. CIT -1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AGRAWAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

House, 5 Yashwant Niwas Colony, Indore PAN : AAACF1246Q : Appellant Revenue by Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.DR Assessee by S/Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & Kapil Shah, CAs Date of Hearing 09.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement 14.10.2020 Agrawal Transport Corporation (P) Ltd & Ors ITA Nos. 651, C.O.No.35/Ind/2019, 331/Ind/2018 & 895/Ind/2019 O R D E R PER BENCH The above captioned appeals filed at the instances

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AVILABLE FINANCE LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

House, 5 Yashwant Niwas Colony, Indore PAN : AAACF1246Q : Appellant Revenue by Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.DR Assessee by S/Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & Kapil Shah, CAs Date of Hearing 09.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement 14.10.2020 Agrawal Transport Corporation (P) Ltd & Ors ITA Nos. 651, C.O.No.35/Ind/2019, 331/Ind/2018 & 895/Ind/2019 O R D E R PER BENCH The above captioned appeals filed at the instances

M/S AD-MANUM FINANCE LTD.,INDORE vs. THEDCIT 1(1) , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

House, 5 Yashwant Niwas Colony, Indore PAN : AAACF1246Q : Appellant Revenue by Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.DR Assessee by S/Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & Kapil Shah, CAs Date of Hearing 09.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement 14.10.2020 Agrawal Transport Corporation (P) Ltd & Ors ITA Nos. 651, C.O.No.35/Ind/2019, 331/Ind/2018 & 895/Ind/2019 O R D E R PER BENCH The above captioned appeals filed at the instances

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

153C and not under section 147/148. 4. Facts, in brief, are that the assessee filed original return of income on 01.5.2009 declaring total income at Rs.7,06,164/-. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted at the business and residential premises of Shri Mukesh Sharma on 21.7.2008 wherein some documents were seized

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

house was made to the tune of Rs.8,10,71,289/- in the year under consideration the Page 11 of 21 Bhawani Shankar Page 12 of 21 assessee has shown the consideration of Rs.2 crore and claimed that the same was invested in agricultural land which is more than the capital gain arising from the said consideration. The Assessing officer

LALIT PREMCHANDANI,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO (IT& TP), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 Lalit Premchandani, Ito (It&Tp), C-5, Windsor Estate, Bhopal बनाम/ Phase-I, Chuna Bhatti, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Apgpp3175G Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.09.2023

section 153C and therefore also the assessment is technically illegal. Page 3 of 7 Lalit Premchandani, Bhopal vs. ITO (IT&TP),Bhopal Assessment year 2013-14 6. Ld. DR for revenue carried us to Para No. 5.3 of the order of DRP, copy at Page No. 49 of Paper-Book, and submitted that the following observations made by DRP clearly

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

153C of the Act after the search. There was no abatement of any proceedings in these cases for these assessment years in terms of second proviso to section 153A of the Act. There is no seized material belonging to the assessee which was found and seized in relation to additions made. In. a recent decision, Hon'ble Delhi High Court

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

153C of the Act after the search. There was no abatement of any proceedings in these cases for these assessment years in terms of second proviso to section 153A of the Act. There is no seized material belonging to the assessee which was found and seized in relation to additions made. In. a recent decision, Hon'ble Delhi High Court

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

house is actually beyond understanding and uncalled for. That the Assessing Officer failed to appreciate this very important aspect. That, in response to the producing of receipts of the donation the same numbering 200 were filed before the Assessing Officer. Receipts are enclosed at page no. 03 to 205 of the paper book. However, the filing or not filing

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

house is actually beyond understanding and uncalled for. That the Assessing Officer failed to appreciate this very important aspect. That, in response to the producing of receipts of the donation the same numbering 200 were filed before the Assessing Officer. Receipts are enclosed at page no. 03 to 205 of the paper book. However, the filing or not filing

SMT. SARITA CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

House Security Deposit 40,000/- Smt. SaritaChawla Loan 5,10,000/- M/s Star Hardware, Bhopal Security Deposit 1,00,000/- 62 IT(SS)ANos.158 to 175/Ind/2015 && others Chawla Group Vishal Kumar Raj Kumar Loan 2,00,000/- Sonia Devi Loan 2,00,000/- Total 16,50,000/- 53. In the above stated list the amount referred as security deposits

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

House Security Deposit 40,000/- Smt. SaritaChawla Loan 5,10,000/- M/s Star Hardware, Bhopal Security Deposit 1,00,000/- 62 IT(SS)ANos.158 to 175/Ind/2015 && others Chawla Group Vishal Kumar Raj Kumar Loan 2,00,000/- Sonia Devi Loan 2,00,000/- Total 16,50,000/- 53. In the above stated list the amount referred as security deposits

LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA L/H SHRI PREM CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

House Security Deposit 40,000/- Smt. SaritaChawla Loan 5,10,000/- M/s Star Hardware, Bhopal Security Deposit 1,00,000/- 62 IT(SS)ANos.158 to 175/Ind/2015 && others Chawla Group Vishal Kumar Raj Kumar Loan 2,00,000/- Sonia Devi Loan 2,00,000/- Total 16,50,000/- 53. In the above stated list the amount referred as security deposits

SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SINHA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

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

Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. Conclusion 38. The present appeals concern