KAMAL NAYAN AGRAWAL,BETUL vs. THE DCIT, ITARSI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Kamal Nayan Agrawal, Dcit, 218, Sadguru Niketan

68,197 = Rs. 24,15,000/- was added. Page 2 of 7 Kamal Nayan Agarwal Assessment year 2011-12 5. Aggrieved, the assessee went in first-appeal but did not succeed. Now, the assessee has come in this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the beginning. We proceed to adjudicate these grounds in seriatim. Ground No. 1: 6. In this

M/S PUNYA SHREE JEWELLERS,S4EONI MALWA vs. THE PCIT-1 , BHOPAL

In the result, for the reasons mentioned above, the assessment order u/s 143(3) r

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Punya Shree Jewellers Pcit (1) Main Road, Seoni Malwa Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aapfp9682A Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.12.2023

197 ITD 677 and submitted that the Tribunal has held that when the AO duly taken cognizance of the statement recorded during the course of survey and passed the assessment order after due application of mind the same cannot be held as erroneous due to lack of inquiry or for that matter requisite inquiry on the part

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 145(3) of the Act. He accordingly reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee by holding that the AO was not correct in rejecting the books of accounts. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(A) deleted additions made on account of estimation of gross profit in the transactions of sale of gold

JCIT(OSD),-2(1),INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 145(3) of the Act. He accordingly reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee by holding that the AO was not correct in rejecting the books of accounts. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(A) deleted additions made on account of estimation of gross profit in the transactions of sale of gold

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 145(3) of the Act. He accordingly reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee by holding that the AO was not correct in rejecting the books of accounts. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(A) deleted additions made on account of estimation of gross profit in the transactions of sale of gold

DCIT 5(1), INDORE vs. SHRI MAHESH BANASAL, INDORE

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue and Assessee

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Mahesh Bansal, Income Tax 5(1), 44, Manish Bagh, Indore Agrawal Nagar, Indore

68 of the Act at Rs.85,31,830/-. This addition made by the Ld. A.O on the basis of the information contained in the pen drive seized from the premises of the Accountant of CHL group during the course of search conducted u/s 132 of the Act during the financial year 2013-14. In the seized pen drive there

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

197 (SC) made. 24 Digital datas When the entire - M/s. Vetrivel Minerals are not assessment has and others Vs. ACIT, admissible as been framed only Madurai (2021) 42 ITJ 55 evidence on the basis of the (MadHC) so-called electronic record which are said to be copies of Excel Sheet, Excel work note book etc., non- compliance of Section

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

197 (SC) made. 24 Digital datas When the entire - M/s. Vetrivel Minerals are not assessment has and others Vs. ACIT, admissible as been framed only Madurai (2021) 42 ITJ 55 evidence on the basis of the (MadHC) so-called electronic record which are said to be copies of Excel Sheet, Excel work note book etc., non- compliance of Section

ASHOK KUMAR MOONAT,RATLAM vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-3), INDORE, INDORE

68 to 69D r.w.s. 115BBE\ncannot be applied to his case. The assessee's reply is re-produced by\nAO in Para 5 / Pages 2 to 13 of assessment-order. However, vide\nParas 6 to 8 of assessment-order, the AO rejected assessee's\nsubmission and taxed the surrendered income of Rs. 75,00,770/-\nrelatable to excess-stock

SMT LALITA GAUR,INDORE vs. ACIT 2(1) INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanilalita Gaur Acit-2(1) 196, Tilak Nagar Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Ahzpg 7543C Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D Patwa. Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 14.12.2023

section 263 on 27.03.2015 and made the addition u/s 68 of the Act of the entire deposit of Rs.1,19,09,150/- and reduced the earlier addition of estimated profit of Rs.5,95,308/-. The assesse challenged the order of the assessment passed in pursuant to revision order u/s 263 before the CIT(A) but could not succeed

RAMANLAL PIRODIA,RATLAM vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-3, AAYKAR BHAWAN

68 to 69D r.w.s. 115BBE cannot\nbe applied to his case. The assessee's reply is re-produced by AO in Para 6\nof assessment-order. However, vide Paras 7 to 9 of assessment-order, the\nAO rejected assessee's submission and although the AO accepted the\nadditional income of Rs. 1,80,27,537/- as declared by assessee

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PVT.LTD.,INDORE vs. THE JCIT, R-5 (PRESENT AO: DCIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS AND FABRICS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT-2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS AND FABRICS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ADDL. CIT- RANGE-5, INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.25,00,000/- alleging the same as unexplained share application money. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was properly explained and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the addition is wrong and not in accordance with law. It is therefore, prayed that