ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment orders interalia for the Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s Page

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment orders interalia for the Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s Page

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment orders interalia for the Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s Page

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment orders interalia for the Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s Page

SHRI HUMAD JAIN SAKH SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,INDORE vs. ITO 2(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

reassessment, the AO disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80P.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the AO's order denying the deduction

DCIT KHANDWA, KHANDWA vs. M/S RAJRAJESHWAR COTTON CORPORATION, SENDHWA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s Cross-

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) & C.O. No. 9/Ind/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit M/S Raj Rajeshwar Cotton Khandwa Corporation, बनाम/ Warla Road, Sendhwa, Vs. District - Khandwa (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aagfr 6243 N Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.10.2022

disallowance. During the reassessment proceedings, the AO had not brought on record any fresh material. Further, the AO had reopened

SMT. SHARMILA DEVI DUNGARWAL,NEEMUCH vs. THE ITO, NEEMUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the alleged cash deposit was actually the sales which were deposited in cash in the bank account of sole proprietor and thereafter cheques were issued in the account of the proprietorship concern. The learned Assessing Officer made certain disallowances

THE ACIT, CIRCLE, RATLAM vs. M/S. MAHALAXMI INVESTMENT AND TRADING PVT. LTD., RATLAM

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Reassessment proceedings were completed after disallowing deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs.42,94,354/- by observing that assessee

THE ACIT CIRCLE,RATLAM vs. M/S. MAHALAXMI INVESTMENT AND TRADING PVT. LTD., RATLAM

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Reassessment proceedings were completed after disallowing deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs.42,94,354/- by observing that assessee

AGROH INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS P LTD,MHOW vs. PR CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Agroh Infrastructure Pr. Cit (Central) Developers Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal Aqua Point, A.B.Road, Vs. Umaria, Mhow, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaeca 2752 L Assessee By Shri Manish Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2023

disallowed by the ld. AO. Ld. AR has submitted that the second revision order passed on 24.02.2021 is illegal, being barred by limitation as the same has been passed after two years from the end of this financial year in which the reassessment

M/S SANGHI BROTHERS,,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 5 (1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2008-09

disallowed depreciation at Rs.2,87,188/- and reassessed income at Rs.1,19,39,318/-. 3. Appeal of the assessee before

DY. CIT -1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AGRAWAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

disallowed the interest on these loan at Rs.3,66,288/- and Rs.4,76,137/- paid to M/s. ADPL and M/s CTPL respectively. 10. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) challenging the validity of the reassessment

M/S AD-MANUM FINANCE LTD.,INDORE vs. THEDCIT 1(1) , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

disallowed the interest on these loan at Rs.3,66,288/- and Rs.4,76,137/- paid to M/s. ADPL and M/s CTPL respectively. 10. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) challenging the validity of the reassessment

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AVILABLE FINANCE LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

disallowed the interest on these loan at Rs.3,66,288/- and Rs.4,76,137/- paid to M/s. ADPL and M/s CTPL respectively. 10. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) challenging the validity of the reassessment

CHANDAN SINGH CONTRACTOR,BHOPAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Chandan Singh Contractor, Cit(A) ( Nfac), E-88/33 Basant Kunj, Delhi Vs. Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaffc8954Q Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024 O R D E R

reassess the income of the assessee by making the disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The Page

JAI PRAKASH SHAHANI,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradjai Prakashshahani, Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/S Jai Prakash Impex, Nfac, Delhi Vs. 73, New Palasia, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Apqps7948G Assessee By Ms. Ruchira Singhal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.04.2025

reassessment proceedings accepting the genuineness of purchases of Rs.1,62,47,803/- and made disallowance u/s 37 of the Act for 3 Jai PrakashShahani

THE ADDL. CIT RANGE -1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

disallowed the loss of Rs. 5,44,57,527/- through these brokers as non-genuine claim. Thereafter, during the course of reassessment

THE ACIT ,CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

disallowed the loss of Rs. 5,44,57,527/- through these brokers as non-genuine claim. Thereafter, during the course of reassessment