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

house. Total Investment u/s 54 F 89,44,991 89,44,991 Net Income from Long Term Capital Gain 1,93,656 3. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny for following terms: S.No Reason for selection of case in scrutiny 1 Large deduction claimed u/s 54B,54C,54D, 54G, 54GA 2 Sale consideration of the Property

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE vs. RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV, INDORE

Appeal is dismissed being devoid of merit

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2015-16 Ito-1(2), Rajendra Singh Yadav, Indore 112/12, Nanda Nagar, बनाम/ Opp. Anoop Talkies, Vs. Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Amkpy2261P Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.10.2024

house property. The AO allowed exemption u/s 54F to assessee Page 2 of 5 ITO-1(2), Indore Vs. Rajendra Singh Yadav ITA No. 152/Ind/2024 – AY: 2015-16 but disallowed the exemption u/s 54B. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal and contested the issue of availability of exemption u/s 54B. The CIT(A) accepted assessee’s claim

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

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 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)

property is to be purchased out of the consideration received on account of transfer of the capital asset. The ld. CIT(A) noted that undoubtedly, the receipt of on-money is on account of sale of land which is a capital asset and as the appellant has invested in a residential house within a period of one year before

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)

property is to be purchased out of the consideration received on account of transfer of the capital asset. The ld. CIT(A) noted that undoubtedly, the receipt of on-money is on account of sale of land which is a capital asset and as the appellant has invested in a residential house within a period of one year before

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)

property is to be purchased out of the consideration received on account of transfer of the capital asset. The ld. CIT(A) noted that undoubtedly, the receipt of on-money is on account of sale of land which is a capital asset and as the appellant has invested in a residential house within a period of one year before

KESHAV KANUNGO,BHOPAL vs. ACIT2(1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Keshav Kanungo, Acit, Flat No. A-603, Circle-2(1), Virasha Heights, Bhopal बनाम/ Near Danish Bridge, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Abvpk 2942 F Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 12.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2024

54B to 54GA’ and the AO issued statutory notices u/s 143(2)/142(1). During assessment-proceeding, the AO found that the assessee declared a taxable long-term capital gain on sale of an agricultural land made on 13.03.2015 at Rs. Nil after claiming exemption of Rs. 50,00,000/- u/s 54EC on account of investment in bonds

SMT ANUPAMA ASSWA,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniआयकर अपील सं. / I.T.A. No. 59/Ind/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Smt. Anupama Asawa, Pcit-I, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs.

house property and not allowable for investment in Plot. Therefore, total under assessment of income is Rs. 1,77,21,919/- (Rs. 91,35,500/- and Rs. 85,86,419/-). 3.3 Thus, during the course of assessment proceedings, you have neither furnished any details nor explained the issues involved with relevant documentary evidence with regard to issues narrated above

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

54B to Rs. 35,49,845. Page 4 of 12 Bhagwat Prasad Malviya A.Y. 2014-15 Section 54F: 9.13 The assessee claimed to have invested Rs. 1,53,57,901 in a fixed deposit, but this was in the name of a different person and not in the designated Capital Gains Account. The FD matured on 05.04.2014, and no evidence

SHRI JEEVAN PATEL,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, ground no.1 of the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Jeevan Patel Acit-2(1) Bicholi Maradan, Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Almppo 483B Assessee By None (Written Submission) Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.08.2023

property used for residence and further investment was made into residential house. Now, the ld. AR in its submissions mentions that it has wrongly made claim u/s 54 of the Act because the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the Act and not section 54. There are three sections being discussed i.e. 54, 54B

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

property\nSale consideration\n202,00,000\n1,37,00,000\nLess:\nIndex Cost of Land Transferred\n11,74,905\nCapital Gain\n1,90,25,095\nCost of new house purchased\n1,26,02,377\nCapital gain exempt as per section 54F\n1,75,00,834\n(19025095*12602377/13700000)\nTaxable gain\n15,24,261\nIn support of our claim, we wish

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

54B and applicability of provision of section 50C of the Act. The assessment order is silent on these points. The provisions of section 50C are otherwise mandatory to be applied by the AO and only if the assesse raised the objection regarding the adopting of deemed full consideration as per section 50C(1) of the Act. The AO has either

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

54B and 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this context the assessee has furnished year wise details of land purchased by him. I have gone through the submissions furnished by the assessee the same is not acceptable. As in the present case it is found that during the course of assessment proceedings it is noticed that the assessee

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

section 54F 8. since the appellant had constructed residential house out of the F sale proceeds which is not considered by the CIT Appeals whilst passing the appellant order. Ground 9 That the appellant craves leave to add to amend alter modify substitute withdrawal delete or rescind all or any of the above grounds of appeal on or before

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

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