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

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(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,INDORE vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION CIRCLE), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,INDORE vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION CIRCLE), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,INDORE vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION CIRCLE), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,INDORE vs. DCIT ( EXEMPTION CIRCLE) , BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE

Appeals are allowed and revenue’s appeals

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

1. Jhanki-Pradarshani & Seminar Rs.13,27,208/- 2. Devi Ahilya Utsav Rs.10,00,000/- 3. Malwa Utsav Rs.8,00,000/- Total Rs.31,27,208/- The only issue which needs to be decided is that whether the alleged amount is liable to be disallowed as donation and charity or whether such amount incurred by the assessee is allowable as business expenditure

SHRI VINOD CHOUDHARY,INDORE vs. ITO1 3), INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Vinod Choudhary, Ito 1(3) 12, Niranjanpur, Indore Vs. Lasudia, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Akrpv 4892 Q Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bomb, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2023

house. Since the large part of consideration was received in A.Y. 2011-12 and the assessee parted with the possessing of property to the buyer and finally sale deed was executed on 27.04.2011, i.e. just after 26 days from the end of the A.Y. 2011-12, hence in view of Section 2(47) of the Act the Long Term Capital

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

1,01,216 Malviya Traders 3,200 Fabrication Work 2,789 Om Plywood 4,639 Cermic World 20,000 Pratap Plywood 23,635 Rashi Insulation 7,783 MP Traders 10,000 Mahaveer Plywood 10,000 Ageco Cables 414 Vidya Corrugator 5,303 Shri Metal Containor 60,000 Total Rs.12,50,843 43. Apart from the above Rs.2

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

1,01,216 Malviya Traders 3,200 Fabrication Work 2,789 Om Plywood 4,639 Cermic World 20,000 Pratap Plywood 23,635 Rashi Insulation 7,783 MP Traders 10,000 Mahaveer Plywood 10,000 Ageco Cables 414 Vidya Corrugator 5,303 Shri Metal Containor 60,000 Total Rs.12,50,843 43. Apart from the above Rs.2

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

1,01,216 Malviya Traders 3,200 Fabrication Work 2,789 Om Plywood 4,639 Cermic World 20,000 Pratap Plywood 23,635 Rashi Insulation 7,783 MP Traders 10,000 Mahaveer Plywood 10,000 Ageco Cables 414 Vidya Corrugator 5,303 Shri Metal Containor 60,000 Total Rs.12,50,843 43. Apart from the above Rs.2

M/S. M P AUDYOGIK KENDRA VIKAS NIGAM (BHOPAL),BHOPAL vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITANo

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & And Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: M.P. Audyogik Kendra Cit(Exemption) Vikas Nigam, Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No.Aaccm6048F Appellant By Shri Praveen N. Surange, Adv. Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.01.2019

Housing Development Authority hence the facts on the basis of which reliance has been placed by learned CIT (E) is not applicable in the case of appellant. Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur in ITA No. 182/JP/2012 (Jaipur Development Authority Vs. CIT) decided on 30.09.2014 has taken a 2 M.P. Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam different view while rejecting the decision passer

SHRI HUKUMCHAND CHOUDHARY ,INDORE vs. ITO (3),INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

house. Since the large part of consideration was received in A.Y. 2011-12 and the assessee parted with the possessing of property to the buyer and finally sale deed was executed on 27.04.2011, i.e. just after 26 days from the end of the A.Y. 2011-12, hence in view of Section 2(47) of the Act the Long Term Capital

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

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. As per the Assessing Officer, the seized documents indicated that the assessee had received certain payments in facilitating the award of sewerage contracts under JNNRUM to M/s. Nagarjuna Construction