CHANDAN GARMENTS P LTD ,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Chandan Garments Private Pr. Cit -1 Ltd. Indore बनाम 27-36, Khutal Complex, Subhash Chowk, Rajwada, /Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaecc 3248 H Assessee By Shri Prakash Jain & Ms. Shreya Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 14.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 02.12.2022 आदेश / / / O R D E R /

68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D. The same was amended by the 2nd Amendment Act; w.e.f. 01.04.2017, enhancing the rate to 60%. Hence there was no new liability created and the rate of tax merely stood enhanced which is applicable to the assessments carried on in that year. The enhanced rate applies from the commencement of the assessment year

SHRI JUZER BANNATWALA,INDORE vs. THE ITO-2(4), INDORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13

section 68, the addition so made require to be deleted”. 3. From perusal of the record, we find that the instant appeal is time barred by 9 days. We have gone through the submission for condonation of delay along with the affidavit and find that the assessee was suffering from illness which prevented him from filing appeal before

LATE MANOHARASINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SHRI SURAJ MANDLOI,INDORE vs. ITO 1(1), INDORE

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2017-18 Late Manoharasingh Income-Tax Officer, (Through Legal Heir Shri 1(1), Suraj Mandloi), Indore. बनाम/ 34, Village Begam Kheri, Vs. P.O.Burana Kheri, Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan : Blspm9380B Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.07.2024

68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D. The same was amended by the 2nd Amendment Act; w.e.f. 01.04.2017, enhancing the rate to 60%. Hence there was no new liability created and the rate of tax merely stood enhanced which is applicable to the assessments carried on in that year. The enhanced rate applies from the commencement of the assessment year

MR GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, INDORE

Accordingly. Thus, this ground is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Gaurav Ajmera, Dcit, बनाम/ 38, Ram Mohalla, Central Circle 2, Ratlam Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aglpa8863C Assessee By Shri Pawan Ved, Advocate & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.09.2023

68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D. The same was amended by the 2nd Amendment Act; w.e.f. 01.04.2017, enhancing the rate to 60%. Hence there was no new liability created and the rate of tax merely stood enhanced which is applicable to the assessments carried on in that year. The enhanced rate applies from the commencement of the assessment year

NARENDRA KUMAR SHATILAL JAIN HUF,INDORE vs. PCIT-1, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Narendra Kumar Shantilal Jain Pr. Cit -1 Huf Indore Prop. M/S Chandan Garments Khutal Mohite Complex, 2Nd Floor, 27/36, बनाम/Vs. Subhash Chowk, Rajwada Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aachn 5568 E Assessee By Shri Prakash Jain & Ms. Shreya Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2022 आदेश / / O R D E R / /

68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D. The same was amended by the 2nd Amendment Act; w.e.f. 01.04.2017, enhancing the rate to 60%. Hence there was no new liability created and the rate of tax merely stood enhanced which is applicable to the assessments carried on in that year. The enhanced rate applies from the commencement of the assessment year

BARKHA KHANDELWAL,AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(1),INDORE, INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanismt. Barkha Khandelwal Ito -3(1) Aggrieved Assesse Indore 1108, Pinnacle D Dreams, Tower -1 Vs. Near Bhawan Prominent School Pipliyakumar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Ajnpk4150B Assessee By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20 .09.2024

68, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. Page 3 of 13 ITANo.85/Ind/2024 Barkha Khandelwal 13. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action

DCIT 5 (1), INDORE vs. M/S SANVERWALA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD, INDORE

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2012-13 Dcit-5(1) M/S. Sanverwala Jewellers Pvt. Indore Ltd. बनाम/ 12, Chhota Sarafa Vs. Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaocs7650K Appellant By Shri Rajeeb Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By S/Shri S.N. Agrawal & Bhavesh Agrawal, Ars Date Of Hearing: 22.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M:

68 of the Act. In cases of share application / share capital prior to the insertion of the explanation the appellant company needs to prove identity of the share applicant only. However, in the present case in hand the appellant has not only proved the identity of the share applicants but also proved the creditworthiness of the share applicant and genuineness

ACIT (CENTRAL) , UJJAIN vs. M/S. ARIBA FOODS (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon'Ble & Hon'Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Ariba Foods Pvt. Acit (Central), Vs. Ltd, 101, Gold Star Building, Ujjain Opp. Treasure Island, 5767 M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aalca7223M Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Vyanktesh Plastics Acit (Central), Vs. & Packaging Pvt. Ltd, 75/7-B, Industrial Area, Ujjain Maxi Road, Ujjain (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaacv6547J Assessment Year: 2011-12

246 - 402 Ariba Foods Pvt. Ltd & Ors. letter duly signed by the authorized signatory of the lender 14 Relevant Bank 247 The entire 403 Transactions 610 Transactions Statement of & transactions to through banking to through banking the assessee 248 have taken 411 channels 616 channels place through banking channels only 15 Relevant Bank 249 i) No cash

THE ACIT (CENTRAL), UJJAIN vs. M/S. VYANKTESH PLASTICS & PACKAGING (P) LTD., UJJAIN

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon'Ble & Hon'Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Ariba Foods Pvt. Acit (Central), Vs. Ltd, 101, Gold Star Building, Ujjain Opp. Treasure Island, 5767 M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aalca7223M Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Vyanktesh Plastics Acit (Central), Vs. & Packaging Pvt. Ltd, 75/7-B, Industrial Area, Ujjain Maxi Road, Ujjain (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaacv6547J Assessment Year: 2011-12

246 - 402 Ariba Foods Pvt. Ltd & Ors. letter duly signed by the authorized signatory of the lender 14 Relevant Bank 247 The entire 403 Transactions 610 Transactions Statement of & transactions to through banking to through banking the assessee 248 have taken 411 channels 616 channels place through banking channels only 15 Relevant Bank 249 i) No cash

THE ACIT (CENTRAL), UJJAIN vs. M/S. FAMOUS VANIJYA (P) LTD. , UJJAIN

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon'Ble & Hon'Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Ariba Foods Pvt. Acit (Central), Vs. Ltd, 101, Gold Star Building, Ujjain Opp. Treasure Island, 5767 M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aalca7223M Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Vyanktesh Plastics Acit (Central), Vs. & Packaging Pvt. Ltd, 75/7-B, Industrial Area, Ujjain Maxi Road, Ujjain (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaacv6547J Assessment Year: 2011-12

246 - 402 Ariba Foods Pvt. Ltd & Ors. letter duly signed by the authorized signatory of the lender 14 Relevant Bank 247 The entire 403 Transactions 610 Transactions Statement of & transactions to through banking to through banking the assessee 248 have taken 411 channels 616 channels place through banking channels only 15 Relevant Bank 249 i) No cash

SMT. SHWETA AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2014-15

246 Mumbai _ ITAT Bench C) Held that on perusal of the said assessment order it was clear that the Assessing Officer had not made any enquiry with respect to the claim of deduction of the assessee-company with respect to provisions for warranty charges, . excise duty, sales tax and liquidity damages amounting to Rs.17.72 crores claimed as deduction

THE ACIT CENTRAL-UJJAIN, UJJAIN vs. M/S ITALIAN EDIBLES P LTD, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central) M/S. Italian Edibles Pvt. Ujjain Ltd. Vs. Udhyog Nagar, Palda Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee /Respondent) Pan: Aacci 2746N Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bumb Ars Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2023

section 69B/69C are applicable. Ld. CIT-DR has relied upon the order of the AO and submitted that the AO has also relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in case of Fakir Mohd Kazi Hasan vs. CIT 247 ITR 290 (Guj) as well as judgment of Hon’ble Kerla High Court in case

SHRI DINESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY,GAROTH vs. THE ITO, MANDSAUR

In the result Ground No.3 of the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2003-04 Dinesh Kumar Choudhary, Ito, Prop. Abhinav Traders Mandsaur बनाम/ C/O P. Mogra& Associates, Ca Vs. 203, M.D. Tower Near Janjirwalla Square Garoth (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaxpc8055G Appellant By S/Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra Ca’S Revenue By Shrir.P. Morya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.08.2018

68,420 3,282 43,385 1,48,258 1,83,120 1,29,712 5,85,155 3.1 Deleted by the Ld CIT[A] 54,200 65,500 82,800 NIL 3.2 Reference of CIT[A] order dt 18-04-13 10-05-16 18-04- 18-04- 2013 2013 Dinesh Kumar Choudhary ITA, No. 757/Ind/2016

DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S MAA UMIYA AGRITECH PVT. LTD. , INDORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit 1(1) M/S. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn8230F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2023

68 63,04,100/- (as discussed in para 7) (v) On account of undisclosed short term capital gain 45,00,000/- (as discussed in para 8) Total assess Income 5,38,80,006/- 11. The AO rejected the claim of loss only on the ground that nobody has responded to the notice issued however, the return of income as well

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

NEHA TAMRAKAR,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, the “Impugned Order” is set aside as & by

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshineha Tamrakar, Ito -5(1), बनाम/ 177 A Sector, Indrapuri Bhopal. Vs. Bhopal(M.P.) (Pan: Ajtpt6475G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

246 A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “Impugned Order” has dismissed the first appeal of the assessee on the Page 4 of 13 Neha Tamrakar ITA No. 175/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2009-10 grounds & reasons stated therein. The core grounds & reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal are as under:- “In the original grounds of appeal

SHRI NIRAJ KUMAR SAHU,BHOPAL vs. DCIT 5 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniniraj Kumar Sahu Dcit 5(1) 4 M/S. Neeraj Electronics, Bhopal Vs. Karim Complex Itwara, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bisps 0556 G Assessee By Shri Arpit Gaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.06.2023

section 44AB of the Act without any qualification. The entire banking transaction as getting reflected in the saving Bank account with SBI have been duly taken into consideration by the assessee and are recorded in the regular books of account of his proprietorship concern. The assesse offered the tax on the entire sales turnover and therefore the addition made

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI VINOD GARG, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

246 Photocopies of Registry as made by the assessee were also filed before the A.O. Copies of the same are also enclosed for your kind perusal. 1.8] That in view of the above it was explained to the Ld. A.O. that development expenses as incurred by the assessee along with his other family members was correct and proper