SMT ANJANA SINHA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

cash Sanjay Kumar Sinha,Anjana Sinha, Rajiv Sharma & Manju Sharma IT(SS)No.150 to 170/Ind/2017 deposits were made on the basis of bank account details called for during the course of assessment proceedings and it is an admitted fact that these bank accounts were disclosed in the regular return of income filed by the assessee. Similarly deemed dividend

SHRI RAJEEV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

cash Sanjay Kumar Sinha,Anjana Sinha, Rajiv Sharma & Manju Sharma IT(SS)No.150 to 170/Ind/2017 deposits were made on the basis of bank account details called for during the course of assessment proceedings and it is an admitted fact that these bank accounts were disclosed in the regular return of income filed by the assessee. Similarly deemed dividend

HARISH CHANDRA PUROHIT,RATLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1, RATLAM, RATLAM

In the result- the Impugned order is set aside as and by way

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2018-19

cash deposited is out of business income and the provisions of Section 69A of the Act and Section 115BBE of the Act cannot be invoked on the business income. Thus, the action of the Ld. AO of invoking Section 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act is against the facts of the case and provisions of the Act and is liable

JAGDISH SOLANKI ,JHABUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER JHABUA, JHABUA

Appeal is dismissed

reassessment proceedings under Section 147 based on information about substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. Despite multiple

SMT. ARCHANA CHANDAK,INDORE vs. ITO 3(2), INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal isallowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy& Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

cash re-deposited in the bank account which was withdrawn earlier the same day (03.10.2009) only.Thus, the same cannot be treated as income u/s, 68 of the Act. 2. Rs.8,82,710/- deposited in ICICIBank Apart from the above mentioned Rs. 6,00,000/-, a sum of Rs. 8,82,710/- which, was deposited in the ICICI Bank was deposited

VISHAL BALWANI,INDORE vs. ITO-3(1), INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivishal Balwani Ito-3(1) 47, Shanti Niketan, Behind Indore Vs. Bombay Hospital, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abfpb 5263J Assessee By Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2024

reassessment proceedings and filing the return of income in response thereto showing a higher income without showing the basis thereof and denying the entries in the ICICI bank account as not that of his and thereafter making out a claim of peak cash deposit

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. I.T.O. 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

cash ITA Nos. 286 to 289/Ind/2018 ,719 to 722/Ind/2017 & 862 to 865/Ind/2019 Shri Vardhman Sakh Sahakarita Maryadit & Manish Kothari deposits in the bank account of the society namely Shree Vardhman Sakh Skarita Maryadit. The yearwise addition is mentioned below:- ASST.YEAR AMOUNT

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. ITO 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

cash ITA Nos. 286 to 289/Ind/2018 ,719 to 722/Ind/2017 & 862 to 865/Ind/2019 Shri Vardhman Sakh Sahakarita Maryadit & Manish Kothari deposits in the bank account of the society namely Shree Vardhman Sakh Skarita Maryadit. The yearwise addition is mentioned below:- ASST.YEAR AMOUNT

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. I.T.O. 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

cash ITA Nos. 286 to 289/Ind/2018 ,719 to 722/Ind/2017 & 862 to 865/Ind/2019 Shri Vardhman Sakh Sahakarita Maryadit & Manish Kothari deposits in the bank account of the society namely Shree Vardhman Sakh Skarita Maryadit. The yearwise addition is mentioned below:- ASST.YEAR AMOUNT

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. ITO 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

cash ITA Nos. 286 to 289/Ind/2018 ,719 to 722/Ind/2017 & 862 to 865/Ind/2019 Shri Vardhman Sakh Sahakarita Maryadit & Manish Kothari deposits in the bank account of the society namely Shree Vardhman Sakh Skarita Maryadit. The yearwise addition is mentioned below:- ASST.YEAR AMOUNT

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. I.T.O. 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

cash ITA Nos. 286 to 289/Ind/2018 ,719 to 722/Ind/2017 & 862 to 865/Ind/2019 Shri Vardhman Sakh Sahakarita Maryadit & Manish Kothari deposits in the bank account of the society namely Shree Vardhman Sakh Skarita Maryadit. The yearwise addition is mentioned below:- ASST.YEAR AMOUNT

MAHAVIR KUMAR JAIN,UJJAIN vs. I.T.O. 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, All appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

cash ITA Nos. 286 to 289/Ind/2018 ,719 to 722/Ind/2017 & 862 to 865/Ind/2019 Shri Vardhman Sakh Sahakarita Maryadit & Manish Kothari deposits in the bank account of the society namely Shree Vardhman Sakh Skarita Maryadit. The yearwise addition is mentioned below:- ASST.YEAR AMOUNT

BAJRANG LAL,UJJAIN, M.P. vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad

cash deposited in the bank account of the appellant which tantamount to making roving and fishing inquiries in the garb of reassessment

BAJRANG LAL,UJJAIN, M.P. vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad

cash deposited in the bank account of the appellant which tantamount to making roving and fishing inquiries in the garb of reassessment

LATE SMT. MARIAM BAI (THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SHRI ABDUL RAZAK CHARA),INDORE (M.P.) vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER - 4(3), INDORE, INDORE (M.P.)

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Mariam Bai (Through Income Tax Officer 4(3), Legal Heir Shri Abdul Razak Indore Chara), Vs. 12, Daulaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Advpc5505A Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2024 O R D E R

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 merely for verification of cash deposit in the bank

LOKESH GHIYA,NAGDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, UJJAIN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanilokesh Ghiya Ito 27, Government Colony Nagda Ujjain Vs. M.P. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aoipg2695D Assessee By Shri Amit Choudhary Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.04.2024

reassessment proceedings and filing the return of income in response thereto showing a higher income without showing the basis thereof and denying the entries in the ICICI bank account as not that of his and thereafter making out a claim of peak cash deposit

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN YUVAK SANGH,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the cash deposits were out of opening cash balance of ₹73,97,814/- as on 01.04.2012, which

RAJENDRA KUMAR PATIDAR,C/O. CA. RAJESH HEERALAL MEHTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, IRRIGATION COLONY

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradshri Rajendra Kumar Patidar, Income Tax Officer, 203, Manas Bhawan Extn, Shajapur 11, Rnt Marg, Vs. Near Hotel Shreemaya, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqlpp9145L Assessee By S/Shri Apurva Mehta & Rajesh Mehta, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2024 O R D E R

cash withdrawals made by the assessee. Thus, the addition of Rs. 12,41,500/- made by the Ld. AO is liable to be deleted. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and claiming to be an agriculturist