M/S NISHANT FINANCE PVT.LTD,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL (I), INDORE, INDORE

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

68 which received by the assessee as temporary loans which were duly repaid after 2 months and in respect of which the assessee had filed confirmation, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet, Affidavit. Sumati Kumar Kasliwal & others ITANo.181,472/Ind/2017,ITA(SS)No.178,ITANo.468/Ind/2017&C.O.No.31/Ind/2018 and others 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

SUMATI KUMAR KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE

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

68 which received by the assessee as temporary loans which were duly repaid after 2 months and in respect of which the assessee had filed confirmation, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet, Affidavit. Sumati Kumar Kasliwal & others ITANo.181,472/Ind/2017,ITA(SS)No.178,ITANo.468/Ind/2017&C.O.No.31/Ind/2018 and others 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

PARTH KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL (I), INDORE , INDORE

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

68 which received by the assessee as temporary loans which were duly repaid after 2 months and in respect of which the assessee had filed confirmation, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet, Affidavit. Sumati Kumar Kasliwal & others ITANo.181,472/Ind/2017,ITA(SS)No.178,ITANo.468/Ind/2017&C.O.No.31/Ind/2018 and others 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

MANOJ KASLIWAL,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL (1), INDORE, INDORE

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

68 which received by the assessee as temporary loans which were duly repaid after 2 months and in respect of which the assessee had filed confirmation, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet, Affidavit. Sumati Kumar Kasliwal & others ITANo.181,472/Ind/2017,ITA(SS)No.178,ITANo.468/Ind/2017&C.O.No.31/Ind/2018 and others 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

M/S PUMARTH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE

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

68 which received by the assessee as temporary loans which were duly repaid after 2 months and in respect of which the assessee had filed confirmation, bank statement, ITR, Balance Sheet, Affidavit. Sumati Kumar Kasliwal & others ITANo.181,472/Ind/2017,ITA(SS)No.178,ITANo.468/Ind/2017&C.O.No.31/Ind/2018 and others 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT-CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

244A of the act. It is prayed and the appellant claims relief that it be held that the aforesaid adjustments are bad in law and the ld. AO be directed to delete the adjustments. Each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds preferred by the appellant.” ITA No.292/Ind/2017 for A.Y. 2012-13 “1. That

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 2(1) , INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

244A of the act. It is prayed and the appellant claims relief that it be held that the aforesaid adjustments are bad in law and the ld. AO be directed to delete the adjustments. Each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds preferred by the appellant.” ITA No.292/Ind/2017 for A.Y. 2012-13 “1. That

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1), INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

244A of the act. It is prayed and the appellant claims relief that it be held that the aforesaid adjustments are bad in law and the ld. AO be directed to delete the adjustments. Each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds preferred by the appellant.” ITA No.292/Ind/2017 for A.Y. 2012-13 “1. That