THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received from M/s SKS Ispat and Power Limited. Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 20. Before us, the Ld. CIt-DR vehemently supported the order of Ld. AO. Per contra Ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the findings

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received from M/s SKS Ispat and Power Limited. Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 20. Before us, the Ld. CIt-DR vehemently supported the order of Ld. AO. Per contra Ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the findings

VIRENDRA KUMAR MANDOT,, SADAR BAZAR SAILANA RATLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO-1, RATLAM, RATLAM

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

164 17,630 1,28,794/- 60,000/- SBI (7050) 28/11/2016 84,263 0 84,263/- 75,000/- SBI (7050) 29/11/2016 9,363 36,800/- 46,063/- 39,000/- SBI (7050) 30/11/2016 7,063 10800+ 89,613/- 54,000/- Central Bank (650) 71750 Debtors Recovery 01/12/2016 13,393 65,700 79,093 68,000/- Central Bank (650) 02/12/2016

M/S. GYAN SAGAR SOCIETY,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), INDORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11 Gyan Sagar Society, Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Mahesh Thahirani, Vs. Income Tax-Circle 1(1), L, Triveni Colony, Indore Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Akgpj5075N Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Morish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Advocates Date Of Hearing 17.7.2018 Date Of 26.7.2018 Pronouncement

section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the written submissions submitted that the first application for exemption u/s 12AA of the Act dated 28.3.2002 which was remanded by the Hon'ble Tribunal to Ld.CIT for fresh consideration has still not been disposed off. Same objects were mentioned

DHARMEDDRA DOSHI,SANWER ROAD, INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), INDORE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, OPPOSITE WHITE CHURCH, RESIDENCY AREA, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2017-18 Dharmendra Doshi, Ito, 147-B, Sector-F, 1(1), Sanwer Road Industrial Indore. बनाम/ Area, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Afspd7034G Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal & Shri Harsh Choukse, Ca Revenue By Shri Sanjeev H. Bhagat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2025

2. Cash book 170 to 198 3. Pivot table summarizing the transactions 211 to 213 into pre-demonetization and post demonetization period 4. Ledger account along with Sale invoiced 156 to 166 pertaining to Cash realization. 1.3. That, the Ld. AO & Ld. CIT(A) had doubted the availability of alleged huge amount of cash for which suitable justifications were given

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AVILABLE FINANCE LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

2 & 3: The second ground of appeal has 5. been raised against the addition of Rs.6,10,OO,OOO/- made u/s 6B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of loan received from two parties namely M/s Chamak Trexim Pvt. Ltd front whom loan of Rs.3,42,00,OOO/- was received and M/s Aereo Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd. from whom

M/S AD-MANUM FINANCE LTD.,INDORE vs. THEDCIT 1(1) , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

2 & 3: The second ground of appeal has 5. been raised against the addition of Rs.6,10,OO,OOO/- made u/s 6B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of loan received from two parties namely M/s Chamak Trexim Pvt. Ltd front whom loan of Rs.3,42,00,OOO/- was received and M/s Aereo Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd. from whom

DY. CIT -1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AGRAWAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

2 & 3: The second ground of appeal has 5. been raised against the addition of Rs.6,10,OO,OOO/- made u/s 6B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of loan received from two parties namely M/s Chamak Trexim Pvt. Ltd front whom loan of Rs.3,42,00,OOO/- was received and M/s Aereo Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd. from whom

THE ACIT-2(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S. TURQUISE INVESTMENT & FINANCE PVT.LTD., NAGDA

In the result, against total disallowance of Rs

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

68,496/- The disallowance on account of interest charges equal to A-B= 17,70,07,208/- The appellant has also considered the demat charges at Rs.673/-. Thereby making the total disallowance of Rs.17,70,07,881/- (Rs.17,70,07,208/- + Rs.673/-). The above action of the appellant of making disallowance of net interest has been upheld by following judicial

DANISH HEALTH CARE P LTD ,UJJAIN vs. PR CIT -1, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Danish Health Care Pr. Cit-1, Private Limited, Indore बनाम/ 76/27, Maxi Road, Industrial Area, Vs. Ujjain (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaecd5554F Assessee By Ms.Ruchira Negi, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.06.2023

164/- from directors and Rs. 15,90,575/- from others. The AO has not examined this issue in terms of section 68 of the act. Ld. AR straightaway submitted that it is a wrong finding made by PCIT, in fact it does not match with assessee’s audited statements. Ld. DR could not rebut the submissions made

ACIT CENTRAL-2 INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI .GAURAV TEKRIWAL, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Central -2 Shri Gaurav Tekriwal Indore बनाम/ 204, Princess Valley, South Tukoganj, Indore Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Acppt 1628 Q Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Arpit Gaur, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.11.2022

section 56 of the Act.” 7. During appellate proceeding, Ld. CIT(A) reversed the action of Ld. AO. Ld. CIT(A) accepted assessee’s claim of long-term capital gain by observing as under: “4.3 I have duly considered tire facts of the case, the AO's order and the appellant’s written submission find that in support

M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS VA TECH HYDRO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

section 9(1)(vi) and section 9(1)(vii)of the Act as well as under India- Austria Tax Treaty on which TDS was not made hence, the AO has rightly disallowed the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6.5. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have perused

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

section 9(1)(vi) and section 9(1)(vii)of the Act as well as under India- Austria Tax Treaty on which TDS was not made hence, the AO has rightly disallowed the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6.5. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have perused

THE ACIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

section 9(1)(vi) and section 9(1)(vii)of the Act as well as under India- Austria Tax Treaty on which TDS was not made hence, the AO has rightly disallowed the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6.5. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have perused

M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS V A TECH HYDRO INDAI PVT. LTD.),MANDIDEEP vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

section 9(1)(vi) and section 9(1)(vii)of the Act as well as under India- Austria Tax Treaty on which TDS was not made hence, the AO has rightly disallowed the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6.5. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have perused

LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA L/H SHRI PREM CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

164 to 169/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 to 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07 Smt. Sarita Chawla ACIT 1(2), Bhopal Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) PAN ADGPC8831N Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Respondent by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 26.11.2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

164 to 169/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 to 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07 Smt. Sarita Chawla ACIT 1(2), Bhopal Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) PAN ADGPC8831N Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Respondent by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 26.11.2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH

SMT. SARITA CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

164 to 169/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 to 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07 Smt. Sarita Chawla ACIT 1(2), Bhopal Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) PAN ADGPC8831N Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Respondent by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 26.11.2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH