RITIKA JAIN,THANE vs. ITO(IT TP), BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAVAN

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Paresh M Joshiritika Jain, Cit (Appeals), बना A-504, Laxmi Residency Chs Nfac, म/ Ltd, Delhi Vs. Opposite Datta Mandir Check Naka, Wagle Estate, Thane

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal as and by way of Second appeal under the Act. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066243407(1) dated 29.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred

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

4. The payment for the shares purchased is made in cash which is not supported by any documentary evidence. 5. The shares were converted into the DEMAT format Just before the transaction. 6. The assessee is unable to substantiate as to in which knowledge he has sold the shares on that particular dated. 7. The company whose shares were purchased

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

Appeals are dismissed

section 253(5) of the Act empowers the\nITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a\n“sufficient cause\" for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. It is also\na settled position by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land\nAcquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others

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

Appeals are dismissed

section 253(5) of the Act empowers the\nITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a\n“sufficient cause\" for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. It is also\na settled position by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land\nAcquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others

ACIT-1(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. SANJAY LADDHA, INDORE

253(4)" ], "issues": "Whether the addition made by the AO for unexplained cash deposits is sustainable when the assessee provided supporting documents and maintained audited books, and if rejecting books under Section 145(3) bars addition under Section 68

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAVI ARORA, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2011-12 Dcit-5(1), Shri Ravi Arora, Indore 1007, Khatiwala Tank, बनाम/ 236, Indraprasth Tower, 6, M.G. Road, Vs. Indore. (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Agdpa8921H Assessee By Shri Yash Kukreja, Ca & Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Adv & Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

253 may appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has power to pass such orders on such an appeal as it thinks fit. Sub section (4) of section 254 attaches finality to, the orders of the Tribunal subject to the provisions of section 256 ( or section 260A). Needless to say the orders passed by the Tribunal

KHOJEMA BOHRA,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

Appeals are allowed

sections": [ "253", "68", "147", "144B", "271(1)(c)", "115BBE", "246A", "132(4)", "133A", "131" ], "issues": "Whether the loan of Rs. 23,00,000/- claimed

INCME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. SWARNA SUKH, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and \"impugned order” is upheld

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the \"Act\" for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066827989(1) dated 19.07.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order\". The relevant Assessment Year

M/S SHRI GURMUKHDAS CONTRACTORS P LTD,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-CENRRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeals in I

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

68 was warranted in absence of incriminating evidence, in the abated assessment. We hold so. In the result the ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 21. We further find that the assessee in response to the show cause notice dated 29.08.2018 filed its detail reply on 14.12.2018. In the said reply the assessee raised factual and legal

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), INDORE, INDORE vs. DIVINE INFRACREATION AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly quash the assessment-order made by AO.\nThe assessee's ground is allowed

253(4) of the Act.\n28.\nWe respectfully agree with the proposition laid down in the\naforementioned two decisions. The language employed in Rule 27 of\nthe Rules is clear and it deals with cases where the respondent may\nsupport the order on the grounds decided against him. Rule 27 of the\nRules states that though the respondent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL vs. SH. PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA, BHOPAL

In the result the “impugned order” is sustained on the first

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshidcit, Prakash Chandra, बनाम/ Bhopal 16/244, Kings Vs. Shopping Centre, Mp Nagar, Zone-I, Bhopal-462011 Madhya Pradesh (Pan:Aappg5194E)

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of an Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060659730(1) dated 08.02.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred

M/S RAS DEVCON PRIVATE LIMITED ,/, SANVID NAGAR, KANADIA ROAD, INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE, AAYKAR BHAWAN, OPPOSITE WHITE CHURCH ROAD, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed\nPronounced in open court on 19

253 of\nthe income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act\nfor the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of a\nsecond Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order\nbearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071145372\n(1) dated 12.12.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the\nAct, which is herein after referred

RADHESHYAM AGARWAL,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT, CENTRAL, BHOPAL , BHOPAL

253 of\nthe income tax Act 1961[herein after referred to as the Act\nfor the sake of brevity] before this tribunal. The Assessee is\naggrieved\nby the order bearing\nNumber:-ITBA\n/REV/F/REV5/2024-25/1074524226(1) dated 15.03.2025\npassed by the Ld. PCIT(Central), Bhopal, u/s 263 of the Act\nwhich is herein after referred to as the \"Impugned order\".\nThe Relevant

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

253/- shown in the audited financial statement and has also not disputed that the assessee society is carrying out charitable activity by way of giving medical relief to poor and also imparting education through Index Medical College and the assessee is regularly carrying out Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 the activities for which it was granted registration u/s 12AA

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

253/- shown in the audited financial statement and has also not disputed that the assessee society is carrying out charitable activity by way of giving medical relief to poor and also imparting education through Index Medical College and the assessee is regularly carrying out Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 the activities for which it was granted registration u/s 12AA

NILESH JAIN,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2011-12 Nilesh Jain, Ito 1(1) 1, Gandhi Chowk, Indore बनाम/ Chandrawati Ganj Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Ajxpj3919M Assessee By Shri Pankaj Mogra, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2026

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 4. The background facts leading to present appeal are as under: (i) The assessee-individual is a small trader engaged in the business of oil cake (khali) at a small town ‘Chandrawati Ganj

M/S RADHISHWARI DEVLOPERS P LTD,INDORE vs. PR CIT -2 INDORE, INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. (Now Known As R.C. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. ) Indore : Appellant Pan :Aafcr1916A V/S Pr. Cito-2 : Respondent Indore Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema Sr. Adv. With Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2021

4 Creative Technocom P. Ltd. 5 Enit Investment P. Ltd. It is further observed from records that the letter issued by speed post to Jayant Security & Finance Ltd. was received back unserved with the remark not know/left however, subsequently somebody filed the information/confirmation on behalf of Jayant Security & Finance Ltd. with the letter 1st April 2013 whereas the notice calling

GULABSINGH RAGHUWANSHI HUF,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE 2(5) , INDORE

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act\" for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal as and by way of Second\nappeal under the Act. The assessee is aggrieved by the order\nbearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066106127(1)\ndated 27.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which\nis hereinafter referred