SHRI KRISHNA MOHAN CHOURSIYA, RAJGARH vs. ITO, RAJGARH

In the result, the assessee’s appeal i

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submission made before him even when the said agricultural land was purchased in tile previous year 2012-13 relevant to the Assessment Year 2013-14. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

RADHAKRISHNA AKSHAR VIKAS NYAS ,VIDISHA vs. THE ACIT 3 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniradhakrishna Akshar Vikas Acit 3(1) Nyas Bhopal Vs. Braj Colony Sironj Vidisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaatr 8725M Assessee By S/Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari Adv. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.02.2024

433 has considered an identical issue in para 5 to 7 as under: “5. We have not been shown that there has been further prescription regarding recipients of donation to maintain record of further particulars in addition to identity, name and address of the person making the contribution, as provided under sub-section (3) of section

DEVENDRA CHOKSEY,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Devendra Chouksey, Pr. Cit-1, Aayakar Bhawan, 20/8, Shalimar Enclave, 48, Arera Hills, Hoshangabad Near Under Bridge, E-3, Vs. Road, Bhopal 462011 Arera Colony, Bhopal 462016 Pan Abapc5311R (Appellant) (Respondent)

433/- on account of conceal profit pertaining to sales and fourth addition of Rs. 37,00,000/- on account of unexplained sundry creditors treating the same as bogus u/s. 68 of the Act. Therefore, from the assessment order it is very clear that the AO made due and sufficient enquiry on all four issues and thereafter, made additions

M/S. FLEXITUFF INTERNATIONAL LTD.,DHAR vs. THE PR.CIT-1, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13 M/S. Flexituff International Pr. Commissioner Of Ltd, Vs. Income Tax-1, C-41-50, Sez, Sector-3, Indore Pithampur, Dist. Dhar (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan Aaacn5986H Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit Assessee By Shri Manjit Sachdeva & Avinash Gaur, Advocates Date Of Hearing 26.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 14.05.2019 O R D E R

433) Vidisha Tractors Vs. Assistant CIT d. CIT Vs. Mehrotra Brothers 270 ITR 157 (MP) e. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Narayan Balmukund Dubey (2017) 30 ITJ 335 (MP) f. CIT Vs. Ramesh Singh High Court of Madhya Pradesh (2012) 73 DTR (MP) 297 g. Abhishan Enterprises VS CIT (2016) 28 ITJ 139 (THIB. - INDORE) h.M/s. Gupta Spinning mills

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

433 Paid for engineering Hydro GmbH, ep Inspection- support for specific Austria forging tasks. Covered by exclusion clause in 3.2 of the agreement relating to general technical assistance by active participation in establishing marketing, design, Production, assembly, quality control, testing, application, installation, commissioning and servicing. Page 31 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016

THE ACIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

433 Paid for engineering Hydro GmbH, ep Inspection- support for specific Austria forging tasks. Covered by exclusion clause in 3.2 of the agreement relating to general technical assistance by active participation in establishing marketing, design, Production, assembly, quality control, testing, application, installation, commissioning and servicing. Page 31 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016

M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS V A TECH HYDRO INDAI PVT. LTD.),MANDIDEEP vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

433 Paid for engineering Hydro GmbH, ep Inspection- support for specific Austria forging tasks. Covered by exclusion clause in 3.2 of the agreement relating to general technical assistance by active participation in establishing marketing, design, Production, assembly, quality control, testing, application, installation, commissioning and servicing. Page 31 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016

M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS VA TECH HYDRO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

433 Paid for engineering Hydro GmbH, ep Inspection- support for specific Austria forging tasks. Covered by exclusion clause in 3.2 of the agreement relating to general technical assistance by active participation in establishing marketing, design, Production, assembly, quality control, testing, application, installation, commissioning and servicing. Page 31 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016

AISECT LTD. ,BHOPAL vs. ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings

AISECT LTD. ,BHOPAL vs. ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings

ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL vs. AISECT LTD. , BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings

ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL vs. AISECT LTD. , BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings