SHRI VIKRAM SINGH PUAR SON & LR OF LATE TUKOJI ROA PUAR,DEWAS vs. THE PR. CIT-1, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2011-12 Vikram Singh Paur, Pr. Cit Son & Legal Heir Of Late Shri Bhopal बनाम/ Tukoji Rao Puar Vs. Dewas (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Agdpp8186B Appellant By Shri Girish Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 .05.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, J.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Pr. Cit, Bhopal Dated 18.03.2016 For The Assessment Year

reassessment proceedings and same cannot be made applicable for revisional proceedings as contemplated under section 263 [In favour of assessee] 6. Assessee submits that the invalidity of passing of an order in the name of deceased assessee, Late Shri Tukoji Rao Puar even when the fact of death was informed cannot be rectified under the provisions of section 154

THE ACIT- 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S PRESTIGE FEED MILLS LTD., INDORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit-4(1) Prestige Feed Mills Ltd. Indore 30, Jaora Compound Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcp0412H Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.10.2023

section 154 of the Act as it is not a mistake apparent from the record but the AO has made reassessment

PARTH KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL (I), INDORE , INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

MANOJ KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL (1), INDORE, INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

SUMATI KUMAR KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

SHRIMATI SHARDA KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL (I), INDORE, INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

M/S NISHANT FINANCE PVT.LTD,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL (I), INDORE, INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

DYPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S PUMARTH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. , INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

M/S PUMARTH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE

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

154, 155, 158BE and 231 and for the purposes of limitation under section 243 or section 244 or, as the case may be, section 244A, this proviso shall also apply accordingly. 6.8 The appellant has placed reliance on the proviso to section 153B which reads as under : (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement

SANDHYA SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. ITO (2)(3), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2014-15 Sandhya Singh Nfac, 121, Rohit Nagar, New Delhi बनाम/ Bawadia Kala, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aycps9215K Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari & Ms. Priyal Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2026

154 to 156/Del/2025, order dated 30.07.2025: “3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is a salaried employee and has been regularly filing his Returns of Income. The case of the assessee was sought to be reopened by the Learned AO under section 147 of the Act on the basis of information received

SANTOSH RATHORE,INDORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE - 1, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

section 154. The\nbench minutely analysed law in this regard and applying the\nprinciple of 'coram non judice' and following aforesaid judgments of\nthe supreme court, it was held that if an assessee seeks to challenge\nthe reassessment

NILIMA KOTHARI,INDORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSTT. CENTRE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Neelima Kothari, Income Tax Officer, 601, N.R.K. Villas, Delhi Vs. 22/2 Manoramaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adnpk7832J Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2024

Section 149(1) of the amended 1961 Act. 52.2. Furthermore, a perusal of the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Ashish Agrawal‟s case would show that it did not rule on the provisions contained in TOLA or the impact they could have on the reassessment proceedings. In any event, TOLA conferred no such power on the CBDT

ACIT(CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI RAUNAK MARU, INDORE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 45(4) would not be attracted on the retirement of the two partners and consequential allotment of their share in the assets in the Assessee Firm. The Court also observed in para 20 of his order that on the retirement of a partner from the firm, there will be allotment of his interests in the firm. The interest

ACIT(CENTRAL)-1,, INDORE vs. SHRI RAJUL BHARGAVA, INDORE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 45(4) would not be attracted on the retirement of the two partners and consequential allotment of their share in the assets in the Assessee Firm. The Court also observed in para 20 of his order that on the retirement of a partner from the firm, there will be allotment of his interests in the firm. The interest

MADHO BIHARI AGRAWAL,BURHANPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 4(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

reassessing on the point.\n4.The Ld. CIT(A) NFAC has erred in confirming the finding of the Ld. AO that the assessee had incurred expenditure of Rs.1,46,13,858/- out of books of accounts merely on the basis of audit report, which did not apparently disclose as to whether the commission paid to the commission agents of cultivators

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

154 taxmann.com 506 (Delhi): We re-produce below this order in entirety to show the facts of case: “This appeal is directed against the order dated 29-6-2018 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "Tribunal"] concerning Assessment Year (AY) 2009- 2010. 2. The principal allegation levelled against the respondent/assessee, based on which the reassessment proceedings under

BABITA CHELAWAT,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed & the impugned order is set aside

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

154. However, the rectification request does not impact the correctness of the assessment order. Further, the department has launched a portal for easy, transparent and effective communication with the taxpayers and order and notices are bring served on that portal which is a legally complaint system. Hence, there is no merit in the ground raised by the appellant and hence

SHRI GURVINDER SINGH BHATIA,INDORE vs. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-3, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2009-10 Gurvinder Singh Bhatia, Addl. Cit, 8/5, Bcc House, Range 3, बनाम/ Manormaganj, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Abhpb 5245 N Assessee By Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, Ca & Ld. Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.12.2023

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee u/s 154