M/S SUPREMO INDIA LTD ,INDORE vs. THE AIT CENTRAL 3, INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Supremo India Pvt. Ltd. Acit Central-3 400/2, Halka Patwari No.52 Indore Vs. Badiakeema Dudhiya, B.O. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aafcs 9822 C Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2023

d) Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal Vs. DCIT, Ahemadabad (ITA No. 3281/Ahd/2009 dated 05.08.2011) In this case, it is held as under:- 9. Since in the present case excess stock found during the survey is not separately and clearly identifiable but is part of mixed lots of stock found at the premises which included declared stock as per books and also

ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), UJJAIN vs. A ONE ENCLAVE, UJJAIN

In the result, grounds taken by Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1(1), V/S M/S. A One Enclave, Ujjain 3687/1, Hariphatak Road, Ujjain

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above captioned appeal of revenue pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13 is directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ujjain (in short ‘CIT(A)’), dated 04.07.2018, which is arising out of order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act (In short the ‘Act’) dated

ACIT 5 (1), BHOPAL vs. M/S VINDHYA SOLVENT PVT. LTD., BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy& Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

17, Para No. 5 of the assessment order) 1.3. Consequently, the learned AO added back the share premium received by VSPL during the previous year by invoking the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the IT Act. 1.4. At the outset, it is submitted that the additions made by the learned AO are based on mere conjectures

DCIT (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE vs. PUNJAB RETAIL (P) LTD., INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 26.03.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Bhopal (M.P.) arising out of the order dated 31.12.2018 passed by the DCIT, Central-2, Indore under Section under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

DCIT,CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI KRIHNA KUMAR VERMA, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI (Accountant Member)

17 by the statement of the assessee recorded on 29/09/2016, the assessee himself admitted the facts that the excess stock and excess cash found pertains to Adat/dalali business of bullion, gems & property, which was recorded in the books of account. Therefore, the AO was right in calculating the chargeability of taxas per amended provisions of section 115BBE

THE ITO 2 (1) INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S HI LINK CITY HOMES P LTD,, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, 2(1) M/S. Hi Link City Homes Indore Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ 06, Sadhna Nagar, Vs. Airport Road, Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aacch5920K Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani & Shri Pankaj Shah, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2022

d) M/s Admanum Finance Ltd. ITA No. 331/Ind/2018 (e) Tirupati Construction ITA No. 522/Ind/2014 (f) K.K. Patel Finance Ltd. ITA No. 440/Ind/2010 (ii) Decisions related to M/s Jay Jyoti India Pvt. Ltd.: (a) Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. ITA No. 493/In/2018 (b) Sanjay Shukla Vs. ACIT ITA No. 333/Ind/2020 (c) Global Realcon Ltd. ITSSA No. 170 to 174/Ind/2020 Page

AVIRAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1(1), INDORE

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

d)such a non-issuance could not have gone to save the proceedings, even if the assessee had participated, therein without raising any objection to that effect 3. the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in making/ sustaining an addition for sums aggregating Rs.8,52,09,9'15/ - as appearing in the accounts of the constituents

THE I.T.O. 2 (1), INDORE vs. M/S HI LINK BUILDCON P LTD , INDORE

In the result, this appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, 2(1) M/S. Hi Link Buildcon Pvt. Indore Ltd. बनाम/ 06, Sadhna Nagar, Vs. Airport Road, Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aacch7180H Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani & Shri Pankaj Shah, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2022

d) Lender account of appellant in books of lender-company filed by principal officer in reply to notice u/s 133(6). Page 6 of 16 M/s Hi Link Buildcon P. Ltd. Assessment year 2012-13 e) Interest paid and TDS deducted by appellant acknowledged by principal officer in reply to notice u/s 133(6). f) Ledger account of Lender Company

INCOME TAX OFFICER INDORE 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

5 of assessment-order. In\nfact, the AO has extracted a list of as many as 17 loans aggregating to Rs.\n2,29,82,730/- from the reporting made by tax auditors of assessee in Form\nNo. 3CD and treated all those loans as unexplained due to non-filing/part-\nfiling of evidences by assessee and accordingly made addition

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani

section 68 of the IT Act, 1961. 4.4 The fundamentals and financials of the M/ s Lifeline Drugs &, Pharma Ltd. have been analyzed and discussed in detail by the AO in the assessment order at Page Nos. 4 to 5. The analysis made by the AO clearly establishes the fact that the prices of the shares suddenly shot

INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

5 of assessment-order. In\nfact, the AO has extracted a list of as many as 17 loans aggregating to Rs.\n2,29,82,730/- from the reporting made by tax auditors of assessee in Form\nNo. 3CD and treated all those loans as unexplained due to non-filing/part-\nfiling of evidences by assessee and accordingly made addition

AABHUSHAN,DHAMNOD, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ITO DHAR, DHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaabhushan Dhamnod Ito, Dhar 1St Floor, Ganpati Market Ab Road Dhamnod Vs. Mp (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abgfa0812K Assessee By Shri Pranay Goyal & Shri S.N. Goyal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2024 O R D E R

D as under: Page 9 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 10 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 11 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 12 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 13 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 14 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 15 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 16 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page 17 of 53 ITANo.344/Ind/2023 Abhushan Page

M/S CENTURY 21 MALLS P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

D E R PER BENCH: These are cross-appeals by the Revenue and assessee against respective orders of the ld.Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Indore. The details of orders of the ld.CIT(A) which are under Century 21 Malls P.Ltd Vs. ACIT (Indore Bench) – (9 Cross-Appeals) 2 challenge by the Revenue as well as the assessee before

THE DCIT-2(1), INDORE vs. M/S. CENTURY 21 MALL (P) LTD., INDORE

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

D E R PER BENCH: These are cross-appeals by the Revenue and assessee against respective orders of the ld.Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Indore. The details of orders of the ld.CIT(A) which are under Century 21 Malls P.Ltd Vs. ACIT (Indore Bench) – (9 Cross-Appeals) 2 challenge by the Revenue as well as the assessee before

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S. CENTURE 21 MALL PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

D E R PER BENCH: These are cross-appeals by the Revenue and assessee against respective orders of the ld.Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Indore. The details of orders of the ld.CIT(A) which are under Century 21 Malls P.Ltd Vs. ACIT (Indore Bench) – (9 Cross-Appeals) 2 challenge by the Revenue as well as the assessee before

DECENT INDUSTRIES P. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(2), BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

5. DECISION: I have gone through and duly considered the submission made by the appellant, assessment order of the AO and other facts of the case available on the record. 5.1. Ground No. 1 pertains to the issue of addition of Rs.66,91,70,000/- on account of share premium u/s 68 of the Act and the same is adjudicated

TYHE ITO-4(5), INDORE vs. M/S. URVASHI WORLD WIDE P. LTD., INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13

5 amounts of Rs.575 lacs were in the nature of inter-transfer of funds between three companies. Burden cast upon the assessee : The company proved the source from copies of accounts as well bank statements of such companies & audited accounts of all three companies. It is a settled position of law that prior to AY 2013-14 the assessee

NILIMA KOTHARI,INDORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSTT. CENTRE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Neelima Kothari, Income Tax Officer, 601, N.R.K. Villas, Delhi Vs. 22/2 Manoramaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adnpk7832J Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2024

17-18: Fresh notice under section 148 can be issued in these cases, with the approval of the specified authority, under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of new section 149 of the Act, since they are within the period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Specified authority under section