M/S SHREE COAL ENTERPRISES (I) PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

seizure operations u/s 132 of the Act were carried out on 5.5.2011 at the business as well as residential premises of Keti Kalyan Group of Indore comprising of various companies, business concerns and individuals. During the course of search Mr. Tikamchand Garg, who is also a director and share holder in various group companies on behalf of the business concerns

M/S KETI SANGAM INFRASTRUCTURE (I) LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

seizure operations u/s 132 of the Act were carried out on 5.5.2011 at the business as well as residential premises of Keti Kalyan Group of Indore comprising of various companies, business concerns and individuals. During the course of search Mr. Tikamchand Garg, who is also a director and share holder in various group companies on behalf of the business concerns

M/S KETI SANGHAM INFRASTRUTURE (I) LIMITED,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

seizure operations u/s 132 of the Act were carried out on 5.5.2011 at the business as well as residential premises of Keti Kalyan Group of Indore comprising of various companies, business concerns and individuals. During the course of search Mr. Tikamchand Garg, who is also a director and share holder in various group companies on behalf of the business concerns

PREM CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act , the entire penalty imposed by Ld. CIT(A) in impugned order deserves to be set aside by this Tribunal. Further law in this regard is fairly settled. The Ld. AR then invited our attention to paper book page 1 to 6 which are copies of notice(s) all dated 19.03.2013 and follow

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act , the entire penalty imposed by Ld. CIT(A) in impugned order deserves to be set aside by this Tribunal. Further law in this regard is fairly settled. The Ld. AR then invited our attention to paper book page 1 to 6 which are copies of notice(s) all dated 19.03.2013 and follow

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act , the entire penalty imposed by Ld. CIT(A) in impugned order deserves to be set aside by this Tribunal. Further law in this regard is fairly settled. The Ld. AR then invited our attention to paper book page 1 to 6 which are copies of notice(s) all dated 19.03.2013 and follow

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act , the entire penalty imposed by Ld. CIT(A) in impugned order deserves to be set aside by this Tribunal. Further law in this regard is fairly settled. The Ld. AR then invited our attention to paper book page 1 to 6 which are copies of notice(s) all dated 19.03.2013 and follow

THE ACIT -4(1), INDORE vs. SHRI MUKESH SANGLA, INDORE

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2010-11 Acit-4(1), Shri Mukesh Sangla, Indore बनाम/ Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Anaps5579F

search and seizure action and on the basis of seizure of incriminating documents. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not considering that the AO has properly initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271

DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S KALYAN TOLL HIGHWAY PVT.LTD, INDORE

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Dcit(Central)-2 M/S. Kalyan Toll Highway Pvt. Ltd. Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No. Aadck9401F Appellant By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 21.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M:

penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 2. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that assessee is a Private Limited Company. Search & seizure

ANJU JAIN, LR SUSHIL JAIN,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

seizure action u/s 132 of the Act, 1961 was carried out at the business as well as the residential premises of the Shriji Polymers (India) Ltd group on 27.07.2017. During the course of search operation, the appellant made a disclosure of income in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and offered the same to tax. The Ld AO initiated penalty

ANJU JAIN, LR SHRI SUSHIL JAIN ,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

seizure action u/s 132 of the Act, 1961 was carried out at the business as well as the residential premises of the Shriji Polymers (India) Ltd group on 27.07.2017. During the course of search operation, the appellant made a disclosure of income in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and offered the same to tax. The Ld AO initiated penalty

MUKESH KUMAR RANKA,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

seizure action u/s 132 of the Act, 1961 was carried out at the business as well as the residential premises of the Shriji Polymers (India) Ltd group on 27.07.2017. During the course of search operation, the appellant made a disclosure of income in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and offered the same to tax. The Ld AO initiated penalty

MUKESH KUMAR RANKA,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

seizure action u/s 132 of the Act, 1961 was carried out at the business as well as the residential premises of the Shriji Polymers (India) Ltd group on 27.07.2017. During the course of search operation, the appellant made a disclosure of income in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and offered the same to tax. The Ld AO initiated penalty

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

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

PRAKASH ASPHALTINGS AND TOLL HIGHWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED,MHOW vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, INDORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15 Prakash Asphalting & Toll Acit Central Circle -1 Highways (India) Limited, Indore बनाम/ 76, Mall Road, Vs. Mhow (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aabcp0398N Assessee By Shri Anup Garg & Vikas Guru, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2025

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted at the business premises of the assessee ltd. company, who is in the business of iron and steel, on 27.08.2015. Assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) of the I.T Act, 1961 on 29.12.2017 and income of the assessee was assessed

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

search and seizure operations were carried out u/s 132(1) of the Act on 7.9.2007 at the residential premises of the assessee. Protective assessments were made in the case of the assessee u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father