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

246A of the act before the Learned CIT(A) who by the impugned order has dismissed the first appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core grounds and reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal were as under:- Sudha Luhadia ITANo.546/Ind/2025 Sudha Luhadia ITANo.546/Ind/2025 Sudha Luhadia ITANo.546/Ind/2025 Sudha Luhadia ITANo.546/Ind/2025 Sudha Luhadia ITANo.546/Ind/2025 Sudha

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

House property). That the aforesaid assessment order is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”. In the “impugned assessment order” issuance of a penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 270A(1)/ 270A(9)(a) of the Act was contemplated too. 2.2 That as and by way of an order (penalty) passed u/s 270A of the Act i.e. “Misreporting penalty

BHAGWAT PRASAD MALVIYA,BHOPAL vs. ITO-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2014-15 Bhagwat Prasad Malviya Ito -3(1) 28, Crp Phatak Road Bhopal बनाम/ Bairagarh, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Afbpm8998M Assessee By Shri N.D. Patwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.12.2025

246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “Impugned Order” has dismissed the first appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core grounds and reasons are stated as under: “8.0 In view of the discussion as above and facts of the case, it seems that the appellant has nothing

BADAM SINGH,BHOPAL vs. ITO 4(1) , BHOPAL

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

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshibadam Singh, Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ 392 Gram Palasi, 4(1), Vs. New Jail Road, Bhopal Karond, Bhopal (Pan: Drhps5664B) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the 1st appeal of the assessee on grounds and reasons stated therein. The Ld. CIT(A) has held as under in the “impugned order”:- “ 7.1 It is pertinent to state that to decide this appeal in a timely manner several notices

MOHAMMAD ZAHOOR QURESHI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-4(2), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Paresh M Joshi & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year: 2014-15 Mohammad Zahoor Ito 4(2), Qureshi, Bhopal House No.956, Bagh Farhat Afza Gate Ke Andar, बनाम/ Gali No.2, Vs. Near Rajesh Cycle Aishbagh Stadium, Bhopal

House No.956, Bagh Farhat Afza Gate Ke Andar, बनाम/ Gali No.2, Vs. Near Rajesh Cycle Aishbagh Stadium, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: AACPQ2965Q Assessee by Shri Rakesh Choudhary, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 17.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed

SANGHVI FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCIT 4(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2018-19

House Scheme Indore बनाम/ No.74C, A.B. Road, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) TAN: AACCS4128C Assessee by Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 18.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 19.03.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee Under Section 253 of the Income

AMARJEET SINGH BHATIA,INDORE vs. ITO 2(1), IND, INDORE

Bench: Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiamarjeet Singh Bhatia, Income Tax Officer बनाम/ House No.63 Panchwati, 2(1), Vs. Janki Nagar, Indore Indore (Pan: Cjcpb5689P) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

House No.63 Panchwati, 2(1), Vs. Janki Nagar, Indore Indore (PAN: CJCPB5689P) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri Soumya Bumb, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 08.05.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of the Income

SHEETAL NATH COLONIZERS,BHOPAL vs. ITO,1(2), BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL

In the result the impugned order is set aside as & by way of

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisheetal Nath Colonizers, Ito 1(2) बनाम/ Plot No.48, M/S Sheetal Nath Bhopal Vs. Colonizers, Near Arya Bhawan, M. P. Nagar Zone Ii Bhopal (Pan: Abzfs4967L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

section 115BBE of the Act was proposed. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was also proposed in SCN. In response thereto AR of the assessee furnished reply on 28.02.2002 at final stage of assessment proceedings which examined and found not convincing. The relevant portion of reply is reproduced herewith. Para-4 of reply dated 28.12.2022 During

LAXMI LAND DEVELOPERS P. LTD,.,INDORE vs. ITO-1(3), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshilaxmi Land Developers Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd, 1(3), Vs. 401-Atower, Indore 6/2 South Tukoganj, Indore

246A of the Act before Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the 1st appeal of the assessee. 2.6 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and has raised following grounds of appeal against the “impugned order” which are as under:- “1. That the learned