C.I. FINLEASE PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-1(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

u/s 271(1)(c) and consulted with a different\ncounsel for filing of appeals in penalty matters that the assessee came to know\nthat the counsel had not filed appeals against impugned orders. Immediately\nthereafter, the assessee arranged to file these appeals on 03.07.2023 alongwith\nappeals in penalty matters. Thus, there is no lethargy or negligence on the part

THE ITO 2 (2), BHOPAL vs. SHRI MUNSHIRAM BALKISHAN VERMA, BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

270/- u/s 27(1)(c) qua the addition so made. Being aggrieved by addition as well as penalty, the assessee filed separate appeals to the first appellate authority and succeeded. Now, the revenue has come in these appeals assailing the orders of first appellate authority. ITA No. 9/Ind/2020 - Quantum-appeal: 4. We first take up this appeal. The ground raised

THE ITO 2 (2), BHOPAL vs. SHRI MUNSHIRAM BALKISHAN VERMA, BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

270/- u/s 27(1)(c) qua the addition so made. Being aggrieved by addition as well as penalty, the assessee filed separate appeals to the first appellate authority and succeeded. Now, the revenue has come in these appeals assailing the orders of first appellate authority. ITA No. 9/Ind/2020 - Quantum-appeal: 4. We first take up this appeal. The ground raised

OM SHANTI MOTORS,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD ROAD, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL - (FRONT OF MAILDA MILL)

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

270\n52 TIMES\nTOTAL\n1,05,86,614\n19,14,18,831\n18 TIMES\n2. From the perusal of the above, it is clearly evident that the\nassessment made is unrealistic and high pitched. It is humbly submitted that\nduring the search proceedings, no such corresponding undisclosed assets\nwere unearthed by the department which could justify such high pitch\nadditions

OM SHANTI MOTORS,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD ROAD, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL - (FRONT OF MAILDA MILL)

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

270\n52 TIMES\nTOTAL\n1,05,86,614\n19,14,18,831\n18 TIMES\n2. From the perusal of the above, it is clearly evident that the\nassessment made is unrealistic and high pitched. It is humbly submitted that\nduring the search proceedings, no such corresponding undisclosed assets\nwere unearthed by the department which could justify such high pitch\nadditions

OM SHANTI MOTORS,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD ROAD, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL - (FRONT OF MAILDA MILL)

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

270\n52 TIMES\nTOTAL\n1,05,86,614\n19,14,18,831\n18 TIMES\n2. From the perusal of the above, it is clearly evident that the\nassessment made is unrealistic and high pitched. It is humbly submitted that\nduring the search proceedings, no such corresponding undisclosed assets\nwere unearthed by the department which could justify such high pitch\nadditions

OM SHANTI MOTORS,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD ROAD, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL - (FRONT OF MAILDA MILL)

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

270\n52 TIMES\nTOTAL\n1,05,86,614\n19,14,18,831\n18 TIMES\n2.\nFrom the perusal of the above, it is clearly evident that the\nassessment made is unrealistic and high pitched. It is humbly submitted that\nduring the search proceedings, no such corresponding undisclosed assets\nwere unearthed by the department which could justify such high pitch\nadditions

M/S OREF SECURITIES PRIVATE LTD. ,MANDSAUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms.Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.70/Ind/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Vs. Ito, Mandsaur. M/S.Oref Securities P.Ltd. 69, Agrasen Nagar B/H. Mid India Mandsaur.

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)9c) are also initiated.” 3. Before the ld.CIT(A), the appellant filed following written submissions: With regard to the Income Tax Appeal in the case of our above named client company for the Assessment Year 2013-14, we have to submit as under:- Ground No. 1 1.1 This ground relate to deemed addition

ACIT-1(1), INDORE vs. KRITI NUTRIENTS LIMITED, INDORE

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

u/s\n144 of the Act.\n4.11 Moving forward we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) in the\n“Impugned Order” has observed & recorded as follows amongst\nothers:-\n“4.2 The appellant has also admitted that in response to notices u/s\n142(1) of the Act and show cause notice thereafter, partial response\nwere submitted

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

u/s 271(1)(c) and consulted with a different counsel for filing of appeals in penalty matters that the assessee came to know that the counsel had not filed appeals against impugned orders. Immediately thereafter, the assessee Page 6 of 16 C.I. Builders Private Limited, Bhopal ITA Nos. 247 & 248/Ind/2023 A.Y.2010-11 & 2012-13 arranged to file these appeals

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, 1(2), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

u/s 271(1)(c) and consulted with a different counsel for filing of appeals in penalty matters that the assessee came to know that the counsel had not filed appeals against impugned orders. Immediately thereafter, the assessee Page 6 of 16 C.I. Builders Private Limited, Bhopal ITA Nos. 247 & 248/Ind/2023 A.Y.2010-11 & 2012-13 arranged to file these appeals

LATE MANOHARASINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SHRI SURAJ MANDLOI,INDORE vs. ITO 1(1), INDORE

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2017-18 Late Manoharasingh Income-Tax Officer, (Through Legal Heir Shri 1(1), Suraj Mandloi), Indore. बनाम/ 34, Village Begam Kheri, Vs. P.O.Burana Kheri, Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan : Blspm9380B Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.07.2024

u/s 115BBE was 30%+3% Cess as on first day of the Previous-Year i.e. 01.04.2016, therefore the tax-rate of 30%+3% Cess shall apply to the present case and not the higher rate, hence the assessment-order does not cause prejudice to the interest of revenue. The reason of projecting such a claim by assessee is that