M/S M.P. MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

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

D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against four separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC, Delhi all dated 18.10.2022 for A.Ys. 2011- 12, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2017-18 respectively. The assesse has raised common grounds in these four appeals except the quantum

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

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

D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against four separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC, Delhi all dated 18.10.2022 for A.Ys. 2011- 12, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2017-18 respectively. The assesse has raised common grounds in these four appeals except the quantum

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

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

D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against four separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC, Delhi all dated 18.10.2022 for A.Ys. 2011- 12, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2017-18 respectively. The assesse has raised common grounds in these four appeals except the quantum

DILIP BUILDCON LTD ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Acit Central-1 Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent /Revenue) Pan: Aaccd 6124 B Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.10.2022

27-37 of the paperbook. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced hereunder:- “12. The term "total number of Councillors" has been used in the Act at several place and would be found in Sections 81(2), 81 (9) (a) (i) and (ii) 81 (15), 19(2), 63 (1) 65(2) and proviso to Section

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

27 (Indore) (Trib.) b. The error envisaged by Section 263 is not one that depends on possibility or guess work, but it should actually be an error either of fact or of law. ACIT v. Technip Italy Spa 150 Taxman 13 (Delhi) Trib.), Pratap Footwear v. ACIT SOT 638 (Jabalpur) (Trib.). c. CIT v. Gabriel India

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

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of the Assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 is directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-II (in short M/s. Bhola Singh Thakur. ‘Ld. CIT], Indore dated 21.08.2018 which are arising out of the order u/s 143(3) of the Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. SHRI RITESH JAIN, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

27) that as noted in impugned assessment order at pages 5&6 that notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 27/04/2016 on return submitted u/s 148 of the Act vide order sheet entry dated 27/04/2016, (copy of return u/s 148 letter dated 27.04.2016 and notice u/s 143(2) dated 27/04/2016 are at pages 5&6 with additional

SHRI SANDEEP MEHTA,NEEMUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEEMUCH

In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradिनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/ Assessment Year : 2009-10 वष" Shri Sandeep Mehta, The Income Tax Officer, S/O. Shri Jay Singh Mehta, Vs Neemuch Vijay Talkies Chouraha, Neemuch (Mp) Pan : Adbpm 8174 B "" यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Agrawal & Shri Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By : Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02/08/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17 /08/2021 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav: The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Ujjain (Mp) Dated 28.11.2017 Passed For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. In The First Ground Of Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged Reopening Of Assessment By Issuance Of Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee, While Impugning The Orders Of The Revenue Authorities, Contended That The Assessment Was Reopened For The Reason That The Assessee Has Made Cash Deposits Amounting To Rs.11,00,000/-, Without Disclosing The Source Of Deposits & This

D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT : The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ujjain (MP) dated 28.11.2017 passed for Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. In the first ground of appeal, the assessee has challenged reopening of assessment by issuance of notice under Section

MUKESH KUMAR RANKA,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law and invalid despite the amendment of Section 271(1B) with retrospective effect and by virtue of the amendment, the assessing officer has initiated the penalty

ANJU JAIN, LR SHRI SUSHIL JAIN ,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law and invalid despite the amendment of Section 271(1B) with retrospective effect and by virtue of the amendment, the assessing officer has initiated the penalty

ANJU JAIN, LR SUSHIL JAIN,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law and invalid despite the amendment of Section 271(1B) with retrospective effect and by virtue of the amendment, the assessing officer has initiated the penalty

MUKESH KUMAR RANKA,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

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

2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law and invalid despite the amendment of Section 271(1B) with retrospective effect and by virtue of the amendment, the assessing officer has initiated the penalty

MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD ,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT -2- (1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

D E R Per Bench: This bunch of six cross-appeals by assessee and revenue for three assessment-years [“AYs”] 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal all dated 30.04.2024 and all Page 1 of 48 MAPAEX Remedies Pvt Ltd., Bhopal ITA Nos. 486, 444, 489/Ind/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 5(1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

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

D E R Per Bench: This bunch of six cross-appeals by assessee and revenue for three assessment-years [“AYs”] 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal all dated 30.04.2024 and all Page 1 of 48 MAPAEX Remedies Pvt Ltd., Bhopal ITA Nos. 486, 444, 489/Ind/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5 1, BHOPAL , BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

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

D E R Per Bench: This bunch of six cross-appeals by assessee and revenue for three assessment-years [“AYs”] 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal all dated 30.04.2024 and all Page 1 of 48 MAPAEX Remedies Pvt Ltd., Bhopal ITA Nos. 486, 444, 489/Ind/2024

MS MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD,BHOPAL vs. ACIT 2 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

D E R Per Bench: This bunch of six cross-appeals by assessee and revenue for three assessment-years [“AYs”] 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal all dated 30.04.2024 and all Page 1 of 48 MAPAEX Remedies Pvt Ltd., Bhopal ITA Nos. 486, 444, 489/Ind/2024

MS MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD,BHOPAL vs. ACIT 2 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

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

D E R Per Bench: This bunch of six cross-appeals by assessee and revenue for three assessment-years [“AYs”] 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal all dated 30.04.2024 and all Page 1 of 48 MAPAEX Remedies Pvt Ltd., Bhopal ITA Nos. 486, 444, 489/Ind/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -5(1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT. LTD., BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

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

D E R Per Bench: This bunch of six cross-appeals by assessee and revenue for three assessment-years [“AYs”] 2012-13, 2016-17 and 2017-18 are directed against three separate orders of first-appeal all dated 30.04.2024 and all Page 1 of 48 MAPAEX Remedies Pvt Ltd., Bhopal ITA Nos. 486, 444, 489/Ind/2024