DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE vs. JAVA BUILDERS PVT LTD(FORMERLY JAVA FOODS PVT LTD), INDORE

Appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Java Builders Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax (Central)-2 (Formerly Java Foods Pvt. Ltd.), 16, Khajarana Square, बनाम/ Ghanshyam Castle, Vs. Opposite Subh Labh, Indore (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aaccj5636L Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Ms. Richa Parwal, Ar Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2025

69B. Simultaneously, the AO initiated penalty Page 2 of 15 Java Builders Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 279/Ind/2024 – AY 2017-18 proceedings u/s 271AAB through show-cause notice dated 01.05.2019. In reply, the assessee submitted that the income was discovered and surrendered during survey proceedings and not in search proceedings, therefore the penalty provisions of section 271AAB do not apply

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. (b) As regards the break up of income of Rs. 41,07,848/-, complete details were filed before the Ld. A.O with the computation of income. In the show cause notice issued by Ld. A.O he himself has referred to the interest income received by the assessee on the hundis which form

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. (b) As regards the break up of income of Rs. 41,07,848/-, complete details were filed before the Ld. A.O with the computation of income. In the show cause notice issued by Ld. A.O he himself has referred to the interest income received by the assessee on the hundis which form

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. (b) As regards the break up of income of Rs. 41,07,848/-, complete details were filed before the Ld. A.O with the computation of income. In the show cause notice issued by Ld. A.O he himself has referred to the interest income received by the assessee on the hundis which form

LATE SHRI RAMANAND TAPARIA TH/LH CHANDADEVI TAPARIA ,INDORE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTREQ, DELHI

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated separately for concealment of particulars of income as mentioned above". Perusal of form 35 shows that Grounds of Appeal are same for both the appeals and hence decided together. It may also be noted that an affidavit has been filed dated 19/10/2024, regarding the death of appellant and intimation

LATE SHRI RAMANAND TAPARIA TH/LH CHANDA DEVI TAPARIA,INDORE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated separately for concealment of particulars of income as mentioned above". Perusal of form 35 shows that Grounds of Appeal are same for both the appeals and hence decided together. It may also be noted that an affidavit has been filed dated 19/10/2024, regarding the death of appellant and intimation

MR GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, INDORE

Accordingly. Thus, this ground is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Gaurav Ajmera, Dcit, बनाम/ 38, Ram Mohalla, Central Circle 2, Ratlam Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aglpa8863C Assessee By Shri Pawan Ved, Advocate & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.09.2023

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

NAKODA REALITIES,INDORE vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

NAKODA REALITIES,INDORE vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

NAKODA REALITIES,INDORE vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

ANIL DHAKAD,INDORE vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-I, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

ANIL DHAKAD,INDORE vs. AASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-I, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

ANIL DHAKAD,INDORE vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-I, LOCATION

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

ANIL DHAKAD,INDORE vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-I, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is also initiated for concealment of particulars of income for AY 2016-17.” 6.1 The AO has also compiled the details of the transactions in the tabulated form giving of the page number of the seized material, the name of the lenders, date of the loan along with amount which was accepted and interest

M/S SHIVALIKA REALITIES P LTD,INDORE vs. ITO 5(1) , INDORE

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

SECTION 292C OF THE ACT Your Honours, first of all, the loose papers and other papers found and seized from the premises of some other persons cannot be taken as an evidence under s.292C of the Act against the appellant company. It is therefore, merely on the basis of findings given in the case of some other assessees, without conducting

M/S SHIVALIKA REALITIES P LTD,INDORE vs. ITO 5(1) , INDORE

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

SECTION 292C OF THE ACT Your Honours, first of all, the loose papers and other papers found and seized from the premises of some other persons cannot be taken as an evidence under s.292C of the Act against the appellant company. It is therefore, merely on the basis of findings given in the case of some other assessees, without conducting

M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ,BETUL vs. DCIT ITARSI, ITARSI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2016-17

271(1)(c) of the Act, whereas no occasion to initiate penalty. 7. The appellant, carves leave to add, amend, alter or otherwise raise any other ground of appeal. 3. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading of gold, silver jewellery

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