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

deduction u/s 80-IC and upheld disallowance of expenses. This way, the CIT(A) granted part-relief to assessee. Now, the assessee and revenue both have come in cross-appeals before us for redressal of their respective grievances. Assessee’s ITA No. 486/Ind/2024 for AY 2012-13: 5. The grounds raised by assessee are as under: 1. That

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

Appeals are dismissed

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

deduction u/s 80-IC and upheld disallowance of expenses. This way, the CIT(A) granted part-relief to assessee. Now, the assessee and revenue both have come in cross-appeals before us for redressal of their respective grievances. Assessee’s ITA No. 486/Ind/2024 for AY 2012-13: 5. The grounds raised by assessee are as under: 1. That

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

deduction u/s 80-IC and upheld disallowance of expenses. This way, the CIT(A) granted part-relief to assessee. Now, the assessee and revenue both have come in cross-appeals before us for redressal of their respective grievances. Assessee’s ITA No. 486/Ind/2024 for AY 2012-13: 5. The grounds raised by assessee are as under: 1. That

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

deduction u/s 80-IC and upheld disallowance of expenses. This way, the CIT(A) granted part-relief to assessee. Now, the assessee and revenue both have come in cross-appeals before us for redressal of their respective grievances. Assessee’s ITA No. 486/Ind/2024 for AY 2012-13: 5. The grounds raised by assessee are as under: 1. That

THE ACIT, CIRCLE, RATLAM vs. M/S. MAHALAXMI INVESTMENT AND TRADING PVT. LTD., RATLAM

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Reassessment proceedings were initiated and after considering the submissions of the assessee deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs.59,15,999/- was denied and income assessed at Rs.1,34,61,390/-. 21. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. Now the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 22. Ld. Departmental Representative

THE ACIT CIRCLE,RATLAM vs. M/S. MAHALAXMI INVESTMENT AND TRADING PVT. LTD., RATLAM

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Reassessment proceedings were initiated and after considering the submissions of the assessee deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs.59,15,999/- was denied and income assessed at Rs.1,34,61,390/-. 21. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. Now the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 22. Ld. Departmental Representative

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

Appeal is allowed

reassessment, the AO disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80P.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the AO's order denying the deduction u/s 80P was bad and illegal. The interpretation of Section 147

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act. The Cross Objections of the assessee stand disposed off being allowed. Revenue’s Appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18, 2020- 21 and 2018-19: 11. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and submitted that section 80IB(11A) provides for deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act. The Cross Objections of the assessee stand disposed off being allowed. Revenue’s Appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18, 2020- 21 and 2018-19: 11. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and submitted that section 80IB(11A) provides for deduction

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act. The Cross Objections of the assessee stand disposed off being allowed. Revenue’s Appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18, 2020- 21 and 2018-19: 11. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and submitted that section 80IB(11A) provides for deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act. The Cross Objections of the assessee stand disposed off being allowed. Revenue’s Appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18, 2020- 21 and 2018-19: 11. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and submitted that section 80IB(11A) provides for deduction

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

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

reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act. The Cross Objections of the assessee stand disposed off being allowed. Revenue’s Appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18, 2020- 21 and 2018-19: 11. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and submitted that section 80IB(11A) provides for deduction

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

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w. section 144B of the Act then the Pr. CIT cannot again ask the AO to re-examine the issue which would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the assessee to face an unending proceedings on the same issue. It is not a case of complete lack of inquiry on the part

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

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

u/s 147 was initiated without there being reason to believe that income of the appellant has escaped assessment. Further, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant

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

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

u/s 147 was initiated without there being reason to believe that income of the appellant has escaped assessment. Further, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant

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

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

u/s 147 was initiated without there being reason to believe that income of the appellant has escaped assessment. Further, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant

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

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

u/s 147 was initiated without there being reason to believe that income of the appellant has escaped assessment. Further, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant

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

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

u/s 147 was initiated without there being reason to believe that income of the appellant has escaped assessment. Further, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant