HASSANAND KHEMLANI,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1 ,INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

house property along with land appurtenant thereto, hence there is no question in respect deduction u/s 54/54F. With due humble request it is submitted to your honour that we have exchanged property at Rs. 7,64,60,000/- adopted by the stamp authority, which is full value consideration for both the parties. Because properties are not exchanged below the value

SHASHI PRABHA SINGHANIA,NEEMUCH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER NEEMUCH, NEEMUCH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

house property. The original return was revised, and a notice under Section 143(2) was issued.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the impugned order had not examined the merits of the case as required by law, and the opportunities afforded to the assessee were not utilized due to circumstances beyond her control. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside.", "result

JAI PRAKASH NARAYAN SHARMA,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

property sold, the\nappellant's claim that the actual sale consideration was fully utilized\nfor claiming deduction is not tenable. For the purpose of calculating the\ntaxable LTCG (before charging deductions thereon) and consequential\ntax liability thereon, the full value of consideration needs to be taken\nas per provisions of section 50C i.e, as prescribed by the stamp\nvaluation authority

SHYAM LAL PATIDAR,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHOPAL

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoshri Shyamlal Patidar, Ito 2(5), बनाम/ House No.23, Bhopal Vs. Near Ram Mandir, Purani Basti Jhatkhedi, Bhopal (Pan: Efqpp51544H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Mohan Patidar (Through Ito 2(5), बनाम/ Legal Heir Jamna Bhopal Vs. Prasad Patidar, House No.53, Purani Basti, Bhopal (Pan: Dphpp2974H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Badri Prasad Ito 2(5), बनाम/ Patidar, Bhopal Vs. Village Jatkhedi, Post Misrod, Bhopal (Pan: Agtpp3050G) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

House No.53, Purani Basti, Bhopal (PAN: DPHPP2974H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Badri Prasad ITO 2(5), बनाम/ Patidar, Bhopal Vs. Village Jatkhedi, Post Misrod, Bhopal (PAN: AGTPP3050G) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) ITANos.286,287&401/Ind/2023 Shyamlal Patidar & Others Assessee by S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.08.2024 Date of 28.08.2024 Pronouncement आदेश

MOHAN PATIDAR L/H SHRI JAMNA PRASAD PATIDAR,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(5), BHOPAL

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoshri Shyamlal Patidar, Ito 2(5), बनाम/ House No.23, Bhopal Vs. Near Ram Mandir, Purani Basti Jhatkhedi, Bhopal (Pan: Efqpp51544H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Mohan Patidar (Through Ito 2(5), बनाम/ Legal Heir Jamna Bhopal Vs. Prasad Patidar, House No.53, Purani Basti, Bhopal (Pan: Dphpp2974H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Badri Prasad Ito 2(5), बनाम/ Patidar, Bhopal Vs. Village Jatkhedi, Post Misrod, Bhopal (Pan: Agtpp3050G) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

House No.53, Purani Basti, Bhopal (PAN: DPHPP2974H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Badri Prasad ITO 2(5), बनाम/ Patidar, Bhopal Vs. Village Jatkhedi, Post Misrod, Bhopal (PAN: AGTPP3050G) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) ITANos.286,287&401/Ind/2023 Shyamlal Patidar & Others Assessee by S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.08.2024 Date of 28.08.2024 Pronouncement आदेश

BADRI PRASAD PATIDAR,BHOPAL vs. ITO 2(5), BHOPAL

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoshri Shyamlal Patidar, Ito 2(5), बनाम/ House No.23, Bhopal Vs. Near Ram Mandir, Purani Basti Jhatkhedi, Bhopal (Pan: Efqpp51544H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Mohan Patidar (Through Ito 2(5), बनाम/ Legal Heir Jamna Bhopal Vs. Prasad Patidar, House No.53, Purani Basti, Bhopal (Pan: Dphpp2974H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Badri Prasad Ito 2(5), बनाम/ Patidar, Bhopal Vs. Village Jatkhedi, Post Misrod, Bhopal (Pan: Agtpp3050G) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

House No.53, Purani Basti, Bhopal (PAN: DPHPP2974H) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Badri Prasad ITO 2(5), बनाम/ Patidar, Bhopal Vs. Village Jatkhedi, Post Misrod, Bhopal (PAN: AGTPP3050G) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) ITANos.286,287&401/Ind/2023 Shyamlal Patidar & Others Assessee by S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.08.2024 Date of 28.08.2024 Pronouncement आदेश

SHRI SHALIGRAM BAROD, ,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble’ Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Shri Shaligram Barod, Pr. Cit-I, Ah/29, Hig, Sukhliya Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. Ahfpp4068H Appellant By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit-Dr

section 50C of the Income Tax act inserted in the Act i.e. w.e.f 01-04-2003. Similar view was expressed in the following decisions: S.No Citation Reference 1 Ms Zubeida ITA No 519/ Lkw/2017 dt 31-01- Shahanshah 2019 2 Dharmshibhi Sonani Vs [2016] 75 Taxmann.Com 141 [ ACIT, Surat Ahmedabad Bench] 161 ITD 627 (Ahd ) 3 Hari Mohan Das Tandon

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

2,00,000/- as income from house property. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that as per the Jaya Juneja vs. ITO A.Y. 2015-16 lease deeds, the assessee was entitled to annual lease rent of ₹1,00,000/- from each property and the same was not offered to tax in the return of income. Since the assessee failed to furnish

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

property. As per the first proviso to section 50C(1) if there is a prior registered agreement for the transfer of the capital asset the value adopted or assessment by the stamp value authority on the date of agreement may be taken for the purpose of computation full value of consideration of such transfer. However the stamp duty value

INDORE PARASPAR SAHAKARI GRAH NIRMAN SANSTHA SAMITI,INDORE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Indore Paraspar Sahkari Acit, Circle 2(1) Grih Nirman Sanstha Indore Vs. 224-Mishal Plaza, Tilakpath, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaaai2629G Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2024 O R D E R

50C of the Act by taking full value consideration as per Page 2 of 10 ITANo.322/Ind/2023 Indore Paraspar Sahkari Grih Nirman Sanstha Samiti Stamp Duty Valuation. In ground no.3 the assesse has specifically raised the issue regarding the AO has made the addition on the basis of market value as per collector’s guidelines of the property without waiting

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI NITESH CHUGH, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

section 50C of the Act. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer has made the additions purely on his guess work and surmises which do not have any basis whatsoever. We do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. CHUGH REALTY, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

section 50C of the Act. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer has made the additions purely on his guess work and surmises which do not have any basis whatsoever. We do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI MOHANLAL CHUGH, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

section 50C of the Act. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer has made the additions purely on his guess work and surmises which do not have any basis whatsoever. We do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting

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

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

50C, 56, etc. The AO is\nnot required to make reference for valuation in this case. Therefore,\nthe assessee's demand for making a reference for valuation is not valid.\n14.\nIn rejoinder, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee requested the AO for\nreference to valuer so that the fair value of property would come out and it\nwill help

PRAGYA SAXENA,BHOPAL vs. PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Pragya Saxena Pr. Cit-1 बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Awfps 9685 L Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2023

2 of 10 Pragya Saxena Assessment year 2012-13 revenue, based on information obtained from AIR that the assessee had sold an immovable property for Rs. 58,66,100/- during the previous year relevant to AY 2012-13, made a preliminary enquiry vide letter dated 07.01.2019 from assessee with regard to the transaction. The assessee filed replies dated

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