SHREENATHJI INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD.,PIPARIYA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , ITARSI

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant’s case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA(4) of Rs. 85,87,725/- made by the A.O.” ITA No. 312/Ind/2018 – AY 2012-13: “(1) That on the facts and in the circumstances

SHREENATHJI INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD.,PIPARIYA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , ITARSI

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant’s case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA(4) of Rs. 85,87,725/- made by the A.O.” ITA No. 312/Ind/2018 – AY 2012-13: “(1) That on the facts and in the circumstances

SHREENATHJI INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD.,PIPARIYA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , ITARSI

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant’s case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA(4) of Rs. 85,87,725/- made by the A.O.” ITA No. 312/Ind/2018 – AY 2012-13: “(1) That on the facts and in the circumstances

SHREENATHJI INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD.,PIPARIYA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , ITARSI

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant’s case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA(4) of Rs. 85,87,725/- made by the A.O.” ITA No. 312/Ind/2018 – AY 2012-13: “(1) That on the facts and in the circumstances

SANJEEV AGRAWAL ,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed

250,\nSagar Plaza, Zone II, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal on 28.11.2016. At the time of survey\nPage 5 of 33\nSanjeev Agrawal\nITA No. 38/Ind/2024 – AY 2017-18\nproceedings a hand written document was found from the iphone of the\nassessee. During verification, it was found that Shri Sanjeev Agrawal has\nmade unaccounted investment in purchase of 11 acres of land

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

4. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued several statutory notices under sections 148 and 142(1) of the Act calling upon the assessee to file the return in response to the notice under section 148, explain the nature and source of the bank credits, and furnish details of her business activities and proprietary concerns. Despite repeated opportunities

ANISH KUMAR JAISWAL,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DEWAS

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

4)\n(5)\n(6)\nThe appellant\nThe respondent\nCIT\nCIT(A)\nDepartmental Representative\nGuard File\nBy order\nSenior Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee's income was computed under Section 144 for AY 2010-11. Subsequently, a reassessment proceeding was initiated under Section 147/148 based on AIR information showing a cash deposit

MAHENDRA KUMAR VERMA,INDORE vs. ITO-4(1), INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Paresh M Joshiआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 482/Ind/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) बनाम/ Mahendra Kumar Verma Ito-4(1) Flat No.301, Classic Indore Vs. Dream, 5-6, Paliwal Nagar, Indore (M.P.) -452011 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acspv2701P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri S. N. Agrawal & Shri Pankaj Mongra, A.Rs. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr 17/04/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2025

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. ITA No. 482/Ind/2024 [Mahendra Kumar Verma vs. ITO] A.Y. 2013-14 - 2 – 2. The grounds raised in the appeal by the assessee are as under: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SURESH JAT,BADNAWAR vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, DHAR, DHAR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisuresh Jat, Ito, बनाम/ C/O S.V. Agrawal & Associate Dhar. Vs. Dadi Dham, 24-25, Joy Building Colony, Old Aplasia, Indore. (Pan: Anopj2666E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri Anup Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act 2.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case of the appellant merely on the basis of non-existent/factually incorrect reasons 3.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ADIM JATI SEVA SAHAKARI S ANSTHA BELKUND,BELKUND, BETUL vs. ITO, BETUL, BETUL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

250(6) of the\nIncome-tax Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals)\ndisposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for\ndetermination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.". He\nfurther submitted that in present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed\nassessee's first appeal although

KUSUM GEORGE JACOB,BHOPAL vs. ITO - 2(1) BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

250 of\nthe Act before the First Appellate Authority and, in Form No. 35, had\nspecifically opted for non-service of communications and notices through\ne-mail mode. Copy of FORM 35 is attached as Annexure (A/1).\n5. That, notwithstanding the said specific selection in Form No. 35, all\ncommunications and notices during the appellate proceedings were issued\nelectronically

ONEEL VERMA,NASHIK vs. ITO-5(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member), Shri B.M. Biyani (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings by issuing of notice under section 148 and passing the Assessment Order under section 144 without any valid jurisdiction. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in completing assessment without serving mandatory notice under

JASTEJ GOROWARA,BHOPAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and raised various grounds challenging the validity of reopening under section 147 as well as the addition made under section 68. However, during the appellate proceedings, despite issuance of several notices fixing the appeal for hearing on multiple dates, the assessee

JASTEJ GOROWARA,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and raised various grounds challenging the validity of reopening under section 147 as well as the addition made under section 68. However, during the appellate proceedings, despite issuance of several notices fixing the appeal for hearing on multiple dates, the assessee

RUPESH JAISWAL,DHARAMPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

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

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshirupesh Jaiswal, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 111, Azad Marg, Indore Vs. Dist. Dhar, Tehsil Dharampuri, Dharampuri (Pan: Akopj7192C) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka & Ms. Eva Rawka, Ars Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18 Page 1 of 10 Rupesh Jaiswal ITA No. 717/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 and the corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That as by way of an Assessment Order total income of the assessee exigible

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE vs. SEWA SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT TILLOR KHURAD, INDORE

4,5,6,7,8,9,11&12 has\nobserved and recorded as under:-\n“1. These writ petitions are being decided by this order as the facts and\nissues involved are same. Though in some of the cases penalty under\nSection 271D and in others under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 (hereafter

OM PRAKASH RATHI,RAJGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT 2 (1), UJJAIN

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 250(6). Therefore,\nthe impugned first appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set\nOm Prakash Rathi\nITA No. 457/Ind/2025 - AY 2012-13\naside and the matter is fit for restoring to him for a proper adjudication. In\nso far as the reason of non-prosecution by assessee is concerned, Ld. AR\ncarried us to Para

ATUL BANSAL,INDORE vs. ADDITIONA, JOIN, DEPUTY, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER NFAC DELHI, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

4) CIT(A)\n(5) Departmental Representative\n(6) Guard File\nBy order\nAssistant Registrar\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee filed their return for AY 2017-18 and later deposited Rs.14,00,000/-. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings u/s 147 after the assessee failed to respond to inquiries, treating the deposit as unexplained income