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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, to urge, to alter or to amend any of the ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that search u/s 132 of the Act were conducted at the residence

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, to urge, to alter or to amend any of the ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that search u/s 132 of the Act were conducted at the residence

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, to urge, to alter or to amend any of the ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that search u/s 132 of the Act were conducted at the residence

SWAN PETRCHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Swan Petrochemicals Dcit (Central), Pvt.Ltd, Indore Unit No.308 Acme Plaza, Opp. Sangam Cinema, Vs. Andheri Kurlka, Maharashtra (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcr9592C Assessee By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & Ms. Ruchira Singhal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.07.2024 O R D E R

bogus synchronized manipulated transactions. The assessee has not challenged the assessment order and the finding of the A.O has attained the finality. The Ld. DR has referred to the show cause notice issued by the A.O placed at page-62 of paper book and submitted that the A.O has specifically mentioned the charge for initiation of the penalty proceedings u/s

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), UJJAIN (STATIONED AT INDORE), UJJAIN vs. M/S. JPJ EXIM (P) LTD., INDORE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

u/s 139 and therefore, penalty proceedings us 271(l)(c) were initiated. The penalties were also confirmed by the CIT(A) but were deleted by the Tribunal holding the same as not sustainable in law, as no specific charge was levied in penalty show cause notice, later the order of the Honourable ITAT was affirmed by the Honourable Jurisdictional High

SHRI VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE PR.CIT-1, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

purchased by you 37. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice dated 16.3.15 giving complete details about the information called for in the show cause notice and the same is extracted below:- With reference to above, and further to our hearing held on 09/03/2015 we are submitting the following pending documents for your kind perusal:- 1. Credit

DR. VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT CIR. 2(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

purchased by you 37. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice dated 16.3.15 giving complete details about the information called for in the show cause notice and the same is extracted below:- With reference to above, and further to our hearing held on 09/03/2015 we are submitting the following pending documents for your kind perusal:- 1. Credit

DR. VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CIR. 2(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

purchased by you 37. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice dated 16.3.15 giving complete details about the information called for in the show cause notice and the same is extracted below:- With reference to above, and further to our hearing held on 09/03/2015 we are submitting the following pending documents for your kind perusal:- 1. Credit

SHRI AMIT TIWARI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2015-16

271(1)(c) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and not under the purview of section 271AAB of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The show cause notice thus suffers from a fatal error which is not curable under section 292BB of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and henceforth, penalty of Rs. 6,83,498/- as levied under section 271AAB

M/S SHREE BALAJI LANDMARK HOTELS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 3(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blea.Y. 2011-12 M/S Shree Balaji Landmark Hotel Private Limited Indore ::: Appellant Vs Acit 3(1) Indore ::: Respondent Appellant By Shri Pankaj Shah Respondent By Shri K.G. Goyal Date Of Hearing 4.6.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 8.6.2018 O R D E R Per Shri Manish Borad, Am

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the alleged bogus purchases. We accordingly delete the penalty imposed on the alleged

RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ADDL. CIT-RANGE-3, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

purchase and stock for the year. All these facts stated in the reasons recorded are taken by the AO from the assessment record itself which manifest that after completing scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) the AO has reopened the assessment on the basis of the same facts and records available with him and no new material or facts which were

RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ACIT-3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

purchase and stock for the year. All these facts stated in the reasons recorded are taken by the AO from the assessment record itself which manifest that after completing scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) the AO has reopened the assessment on the basis of the same facts and records available with him and no new material or facts which were

RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ITO-2(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

purchase and stock for the year. All these facts stated in the reasons recorded are taken by the AO from the assessment record itself which manifest that after completing scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) the AO has reopened the assessment on the basis of the same facts and records available with him and no new material or facts which were

SHRI SANJAY SOMANI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT-5(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed for all

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargbefore Shri Chandra Mohan Gargbefore Shri Chandra Mohan Gargbefore Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meena, Accountant & Shri O.P.Meena & Shri O.P.Meena, Accountant & Shri O.P.Meenamember Member

u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act were initiated in respect of above addition. In reply to penalty show cause notice, the AO noted that it is not the case of a remission of profit as the assessee has submitted inaccurate particulars showing that the purchases were made from bogus

RAMA GARG,SEHORE vs. DCIT-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Rama Garg, Dcit-3(1), Gadhi Chok, Bhopal Chota Bazar, Vs. Nasrullaganj, Sehore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abcpg1140J Assessee By Shri R.K. Mangal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.06.2024

purchases however, the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of electricity 2 Smt. Rama Garg charges has been confirmed by this Tribunal and consequently the CIT(A) has restricted the penalty to the extent of disallowance of electricity expenses. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the electricity expenses claimed by the assessee

SHRI DILIP KUMAR JAIN S/O. SAMRATHMAL JAIN,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. Nos. 529 & 530/Ind/2015 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Dilip Kumar Jain, Vs. Dy. Cit, S/O Shri Samrathmal Indore. Jain, Prop. M/S. Shree Kshemkari Steel, 559, Ushanagar Extn., Indore अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Abjrj8096M

bogus purchases from the material available on record, it appeared that the Tax Audit Report and books of account were accepted by the Assessing Officer without pointing out any defect, Accordingly, the sale was accepted by the department. The sale could not be made without making purchase, in other words, when there was a sale, certainly there was a purchase

SHRI DILIP KUMAR JAIN S/O. SAMRATHMAL JAIN,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. Nos. 529 & 530/Ind/2015 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Dilip Kumar Jain, Vs. Dy. Cit, S/O Shri Samrathmal Indore. Jain, Prop. M/S. Shree Kshemkari Steel, 559, Ushanagar Extn., Indore अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Abjrj8096M

bogus purchases from the material available on record, it appeared that the Tax Audit Report and books of account were accepted by the Assessing Officer without pointing out any defect, Accordingly, the sale was accepted by the department. The sale could not be made without making purchase, in other words, when there was a sale, certainly there was a purchase

SHRI CDR, UDAI SINGH,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.791/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 Cdr Udaisingh Bhopal Pan – Aglps – 7299C :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs Acit 3(1) :: ""यथ" /Respondent Bhopal Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah Shri K.G. Goyal राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By 12.1.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख Date Of Hearing 19.1.2017 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख Date Of Pronouncement

purchase and sale deed were submitted. The assessee submitted that the assessee has entered into sale agreement and also obtained the power of attorney. The said land was not registered in the name of the assessee and the said property was not transferred to him and, therefore, the assessee was under the impression that the liability of short term capital