DCIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL vs. SHAILENDRA SHARMA, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment

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

section 153A of the act. The assessee has failed to discharge the onus to prove the credit worthiness and genuineness of the transaction of unsecured loans and therefore, the Assessing Officer has justified in making the addition on this account. He has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. IT(SS) No.30 & 31/Ind/2023 ITA (SS) No.305/Ind/2023 Shailendra Sharma

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

Appeal is allowed

reassess income even if it was not the primary reason for reopening, provided the initial notice is valid.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "147", "148", "80P", "143(2)", "142

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), INDORE, INDORE vs. DIVINE INFRACREATION AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly quash the assessment-order made by AO.\nThe assessee's ground is allowed

Section 292BB not applicable- Reassessment not valid- Income Tax Act,\n1961, ss.143,147,292BB 336 ITR 678 - CIT V/s Rajeev Sharma (Allahabad) (Case\nlaws Paper book pages 62-\n68) Reassessment - Procedure - Return in response to Notice_u/s_148 - Assessing\nOfficer (8 of 13) [ITA-197/2018] must apply his mind and issue Notice u/s_143(2) -\nProcedure must be followed strictly\nIncome

BHOLA SINGH THAKUR,INDORE vs. I T O 4(1), INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2010-11

142, sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 143.” 6. The question, however, remains whether Section 292BB which came into effect on and from 01.04.2008 has effected any change. Said Section 292BB is to the following effect:- “292BB. Notice deemed to be valid in certain circumstances. – Where an assessee has appeared in any proceeding or cooperated in any inquiry relating

NARENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL,BURHANPUR vs. PCIT INDORE-1, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarendra Kumar Agrawal Pcit (1) 203, Ck Campus Aaykar Bhawan Bahadarpur Road Vs. Indore Burhanpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adapa0131B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2024

142(1) dated 09.03.2022 which was replied by the assessee vide reply dated 15.03.2022. The assesse also produced the relevant supporting documents including copy of account of derivative transactions, ledger account of M/s Xpro Securities (broker) in the books of assessee, copy of contract note issued by M/s Xpro Securities during the reassessment proceedings. The AO after considering reply

MANJU YADAV,INDORE vs. ITO-1(2), INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment proceedings against the assessee and the assessment was completed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income-tax Act. 1961 (“the Act”). In the course of such assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 142

M/S RADHISHWARI DEVLOPERS P LTD,INDORE vs. PR CIT -2 INDORE, INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. (Now Known As R.C. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. ) Indore : Appellant Pan :Aafcr1916A V/S Pr. Cito-2 : Respondent Indore Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema Sr. Adv. With Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2021

reassessment by invoking the provisions of section 263 may kindly be dropped. Without prejudice to the above as far as merit of the issues reaised in show-cause notice in question are concerned, we have to submit that the learned Assessing Officer has issued notices u/s 133(6) in loan creditor companies (supra). That after getting the requisite details

AJIT BONDRIYA,LIMASSOL, CYPRUS vs. ITO 2(5), BHOPAL, BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 142(1) of the Act enclosing:\na) Copy of Equity transaction statement\nb) Copy of bank statement FY 2015-16\n40\n35\n21-24\n11.\nShow Cause Notice dated 24.11.2023 issued u/s 144 of the Act.\n41-42\n12.\nAcknowledgement of Reply dated 29.11.2023 in response to show\ncause notice dated 24.11.2023 enclosing:\n43-44\nPage

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

Appeal is dismissed

sections": [ "147", "144", "144B", "139", "148", "142(1)", "143(2)", "69A", "115BBE", "271AAC", "274", "151", "143(3)", "144B" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment

M/S SHRI GURMUKHDAS CONTRACTORS P LTD,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-CENRRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeals in I

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of section 144BA.]" 9.1 The above provisions of section 153D of the Act were inserted by Finance Act, 2007 with effect from 01/06/2007. In our humble understanding of the said

SANDHYA SINGH,ROHIT NAGAR, BHOPAL vs. ITO 2(3) BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued several statutory notices under sections 148 and 142(1) of the Act calling upon

THE ITO, - 2, ITARSI vs. M/S. MANISH KUMAR RAKESH KUMAR, HOSHAGABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2005-06

section 143 (2) and 142(1) of the Act and completed the reassessment under section 147 upon determining the taxable

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts16 necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year:” 57 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 35. Thus, it appears that the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act places a bar on issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act after the expiry

THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts16 necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year:” 57 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 35. Thus, it appears that the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act places a bar on issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act after the expiry

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts16 necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year:” 57 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 35. Thus, it appears that the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act places a bar on issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act after the expiry

PRAMOD PALIWAL,KHANWA vs. ACIT KHANWA, KHANWA

In the result Ground No. 1 (a) &

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year 2009-10 Shri Pramod Paliwal, Acit, Prop. M/S. Pragati Vs. Khandwa Construction, Ramkishanganj, Khandwa (M.P) (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan Adapp8012A Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal Sr.Dr Assessee By S/Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gaur, Cas Date Of Hearing 10.10.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 17.10.2019 O R D E R

142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment, for the assessment year. 9. So the Ld. A.O needs to fulfill this condition before proceeding to initiate the reassessment

JAYANTILAL SANGHVI,INDORE vs. ACIT 4(1), INDORE

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Jayantilal Sanghvi, Acit, 8/10, Warehouse Road, 4(1), बनाम/ Patel Bridge, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Agtps5825Q Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, C.A. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement .06.2024

142(1) giving certain details in Point No. 3. Taking support from above, Ld. AR contended that the assessee has disclosed all facts fully and truly to the department/AO prior to or during original assessment. Therefore, re-opening of assessment by AO after expiry of four years from end of the relevant assessment-year is barred by Proviso to section

THE ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. DB POWER LTD, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Db Power Limited, Acit, Central Circle-1, बनाम/ Office Block, 1A, Bhopal Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Acit, Central Circle-1, M/S Db Power Limited, बनाम/ Bhopal Office Block, 1A, Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent)

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections