URMILA JAIN ,SANWER vs. THE ITO, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

68,000/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A of the Act. The Assessing Officer also imposed penalty under section 272A(1)(d

URMILA JAIN,SANWER vs. THE ITO 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

68,000/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A of the Act. The Assessing Officer also imposed penalty under section 272A(1)(d

ROHIT DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

68,870/-\nΑ.Υ. 2015-16\nIncome shown in the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nIncome shown in the return filed in response to notice Rs.\nu/s 153A of the Act\n2,34,140/-\nTotal income assessed\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nRohit Darak\nITA No. 99 to 104/Ind/2025\nA.Ys

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

ROHIT DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

68,870/-\nΑ.Υ. 2015-16\nIncome shown in the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nIncome shown in the return filed in response to notice Rs.\nu/s 153A of the Act\n2,34,140/-\nTotal income assessed\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nRohit Darak\nITA No. 99 to 104/Ind/2025\nA.Ys

ROHIT DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

68,870/-\nΑ.Υ. 2015-16\nIncome shown in the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nIncome shown in the return filed in response to notice Rs.\n2,34,140/-\nu/s 153A of the Act\nTotal income assessed\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nRohit Darak\nITA No. 99 to 104/Ind/2025\nA.Ys

ROHIT DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

68,870/-\nΑ.Υ. 2015-16\nIncome shown in the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nIncome shown in the return filed in response to notice Rs.\nu/s 153A of the Act\n2,34,140/-\nTotal income assessed\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17\nIncome shown in the return filed

ROHIT DARAK,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

68,870/-\nΑ.Υ. 2015-16\nIncome shown in the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nIncome shown in the return filed in response to notice Rs.\n2,34,140/-\nu/s 153A of the Act\nTotal income assessed\nRs.\n2,34,140/-\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17\nIncome shown in the return filed

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

272A(1)(d), 271B & 271AAC(1) respectively for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 195 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.75/Ind/2024 and 84 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.76 to ITANo.75 to 80/Ind/2024 Najma Pathan 80/Ind/2024. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in the affidavit. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessment

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

272A(1)(d), 271B & 271AAC(1) respectively for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 195 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.75/Ind/2024 and 84 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.76 to ITANo.75 to 80/Ind/2024 Najma Pathan 80/Ind/2024. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in the affidavit. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessment

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

272A(1)(d), 271B & 271AAC(1) respectively for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 195 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.75/Ind/2024 and 84 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.76 to ITANo.75 to 80/Ind/2024 Najma Pathan 80/Ind/2024. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in the affidavit. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessment

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

272A(1)(d), 271B & 271AAC(1) respectively for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 195 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.75/Ind/2024 and 84 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.76 to ITANo.75 to 80/Ind/2024 Najma Pathan 80/Ind/2024. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in the affidavit. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessment

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

272A(1)(d), 271B & 271AAC(1) respectively for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 195 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.75/Ind/2024 and 84 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.76 to ITANo.75 to 80/Ind/2024 Najma Pathan 80/Ind/2024. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in the affidavit. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessment

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

272A(1)(d), 271B & 271AAC(1) respectively for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 195 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.75/Ind/2024 and 84 days for filing the appeal in ITANo.76 to ITANo.75 to 80/Ind/2024 Najma Pathan 80/Ind/2024. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in the affidavit. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessment