GURVINDER KAUR BHATIA ,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2015-16

1) of section 10(10D) of the Act, the receipt are taxable in the hands of assignee i.e. assessee even if they are assigned before the date of said amendment. Although the assignment has been completed before the amendment date i.e. 31.03.2013, but the same does not change the nature and character of the receipt, which have been received after

HARLEEN KAUR BHATIA,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2015-16

1) of section 10(10D) of the Act, the receipt are taxable in the hands of assignee i.e. assessee even if they are assigned before the date of said amendment. Although the assignment has been completed before the amendment date i.e. 31.03.2013, but the same does not change the nature and character of the receipt, which have been received after

SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

1 of 21 Bhawani Shankar Page 2 of 21 the assesse is a farmer and does not use the e-mail ID and therefore, the assesse was not aware about the impugned order passed by the Pr. CIT. He has referred to para 3 of the impugned order and submitted that the Pr. CIT has issued show cause notice dated

M/S. BHANDARI HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Bhandari Hospital & Pr. Cit-(I) Research Centre, Gf-21 & Indore बनाम/ 22, Opp. Meghdoot Garden, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aadfb8151A

1) was justified. It was shown at any stage of the proceedings that the amount in question was fixed or quantified as loss of agricultural income and, admittedly, it was not so found by the Tribunal. The further question whether it would be agricultural income within the meaning of section 2 (IA) did not arise for consideration. It was evident

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

1. Out of unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

1. Out of unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

1. Out of unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

1. Out of unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263

S GANDHI JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18 S. Gandhi Jewellery Pcit-1, Private Limited, Indore C/O Adv. Hitesh Chimnani, बनाम/ Ug-37 Trade Centre, Vs. 18, South Tukoganj, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aamcs1613G Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.02.2025

section 263(1). 9. Ld. AR relied upon a decision of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Indore in Shri Chandmal Hukumchand Jain Vs. PCIT (2024) 36 ITJ Online 221 (Trib. – Indore) wherein the assessing authority made addition of Rs. 4,00,000/- being 10% of the unsecured loan of Rs. 40,00,000/- taken by assessee and the PCIT invoked

RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ITO-2(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

reassessment. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the honourable CIT(A) was not justified in upholding that the receipt from job work of mixing of rubber at Rs. 34,19,894 was not the business receipts/income and in confirming the same was income from other sources. 3.On the facts and in the circumstances

RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ADDL. CIT-RANGE-3, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

reassessment. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the honourable CIT(A) was not justified in upholding that the receipt from job work of mixing of rubber at Rs. 34,19,894 was not the business receipts/income and in confirming the same was income from other sources. 3.On the facts and in the circumstances

RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ACIT-3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

reassessment. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the honourable CIT(A) was not justified in upholding that the receipt from job work of mixing of rubber at Rs. 34,19,894 was not the business receipts/income and in confirming the same was income from other sources. 3.On the facts and in the circumstances

M/S. SANEE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT , BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Sanee Infrastructure Pr.Cit-2, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Bhopal D-1, Machna Colony, 6 No Bus Stop, Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Aagcs8307M Appellant By Shri Arun Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit Date Of Hearing 12.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 01.06.2020 O R D E R

1 of Section 143 of the Act. The A.O should protect the interest of the revenue and to see that no one dodge the revenue to escape the legitimate tax. The A.O is not expected to put blinkers on his eyes and accept the claim him. It is his duty to ascertain the truth of the facts stated

LATE SMT SUSHILA BISARYA, BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, we are Shri Jignesh Lilachand Shah vs

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanilate Smt. Sushila Bisarya Pr. Cit-1 L.H. Pramod Bisarya Bhopal Vs. 125 Malviya Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aewpb 2587 D Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.08.2023

section 263 cannot be invoked against the invalid assessment order. He has relied upon the following judgments: 1. ITO vs. Durlabhbhai Kanubhai Rajpara 270 taxman 9 (SC) 2.Sheel Devi vs. Pr. CIT, in ITANo.1853/Del/2021 (ITAT Delhi) 3. Hiraben Babubhai Patel vs. Pr. CIT in ITANo.700/Ahd/2019 (ITAT, Ahmedabad 4. Jignesh Lilachand Shah vs. Pr. CIT in ITANo.149/Ahd/2021 (ITAT, Ahmedabad

MS. SANGEETA CHOPRA,UJJAIN vs. THE PR. CIT. UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

263(1) of the Act. 1.2 The learned A.O. allowed deduction under section 54 as claimed by the appellant on account of construction of new house after verifying and examining Sale Deed, necessary approvals, Valuation Report, Bank Statements and other relevant documents submitted and produced during the course of assessment. 1.3 It is also important to note that there

M/S M.P.WAREHOUSING & LOGISTIC CORPORATION,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S M.P. Warehousing Pr. Cit-1 & Logistic Corporation, Bhopal बनाम/ Office Complex, Block-1, Gautam Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aadcm 7742 B Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

1) of section 263 of the Act is an enabling provision which confers jurisdiction on the CIT to revise an assessment order which he considers erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The process of revision u/s 263 of the Act initiates only when the CIT calls for and examines the record of any proceeding under this

M/S DBL BETUL SARMI TOLLWAYAS,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-1, INDORE

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

1) of section 263 of the Act is an enabling provision which confers jurisdiction on the CIT to revise an assessment order which he Page 7 of 10 M/s DBL vs. Pr. CIT I, Bhopal ITA Nos. 144 to 147/Ind/2020 Assessment year 2015-16 considers erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The process of revision u/s 263

M/S DBL ASHOKNAGAR VIDISHA TOLLWAYS LTD,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

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

1) of section 263 of the Act is an enabling provision which confers jurisdiction on the CIT to revise an assessment order which he Page 7 of 10 M/s DBL vs. Pr. CIT I, Bhopal ITA Nos. 144 to 147/Ind/2020 Assessment year 2015-16 considers erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The process of revision u/s 263