ACIT 2 (1), INDORE vs. M/S JILA INDUSTRIES LTD, DHAR

In the result this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R.Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyanivirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit-2(1), Indore M/S. Jiji Industries Ltd., (Formerly Known As बनाम/ Krishna Profiles Pvt. Ltd.), Vs. Plot No.316, Sejwaya, Billod, Dhar (Mp) (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A.N. - Aacck 1383 M Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ca Date Of Hearing: 02.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.02.2022

43B of the IT Act. In the absence of the assessee’s substantiating the genuiness of the claim of commission payment of Rs. 1,71,32,125/-, the claim is not allowed and hence it is added back to the total income of the assessee.” 5.3 The Ld. CIT(A) has, however, deleted the disallowance vide Para

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI SANJAY SHUKLA, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Shri Sanjay Shukla, Acit Central Circle 2, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessment Year:2013-14 Acit Central Circle 2, Shri Sanjay Shukla, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03..2022 आदेश / O R D E R

68 of the Act were deleted. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the finding of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition for unexplained loan and interest paid thereon at Rs.3,86,23,218/-. Thus ground no.1 raised by the revenue is dismissed. 13. Apropos to ground no.2 which relates to deletion of addition of Rs. 3,57,623/- made

SHRI SANJAY SHUKLA ,INDORE vs. ACIT,CENTRAL-CIRLE-2, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Shri Sanjay Shukla, Acit Central Circle 2, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessment Year:2013-14 Acit Central Circle 2, Shri Sanjay Shukla, बनाम/ Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Ahqps8882D Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03..2022 आदेश / O R D E R

68 of the Act were deleted. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the finding of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition for unexplained loan and interest paid thereon at Rs.3,86,23,218/-. Thus ground no.1 raised by the revenue is dismissed. 13. Apropos to ground no.2 which relates to deletion of addition of Rs. 3,57,623/- made

SUPREME AUTO 9INDIA) PVT,LTD,, INDORE vs. ITO1 (4), INDORE

In the result, the appealof assesseeis partly allowed in terms indicated above

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani

section 43B on payment basis and therefore the disallowance made by lower authorities is wrong and Supreme Auto India Pvt. Ltd. ITANo.133/Ind/2020 Page 6 of 9 deserves to be deleted. We order accordingly. This ground is thus allowed. Ground No. 4: 11. This ground relates to the addition of Rs. 1,71,680/- u/s 68

M/S LIFE CARE INTERNATIONAL,INDORE vs. ACIT-3,(1) , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

43B(d) of the Act. However, assessee failed to find any favour from the Ld. Assessing Officer. As Ld. Assessing Officer making detailed observation as appearing at 45 to 52 of the assessment order dated 07.03.2014 denied the claim and made the addition of Rs.60,61,225/-. Ld. Assessing Officer also disallowed interest claim of Rs.24,47,865/-, since

M/S LIFE CARE INTERNATIONAL,INDORE vs. JCIT-3, INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

43B(d) of the Act. However, assessee failed to find any favour from the Ld. Assessing Officer. As Ld. Assessing Officer making detailed observation as appearing at 45 to 52 of the assessment order dated 07.03.2014 denied the claim and made the addition of Rs.60,61,225/-. Ld. Assessing Officer also disallowed interest claim of Rs.24,47,865/-, since

M/S LIFE CARE INTERNATIONAL,INDORE vs. ACIT-3,(1) , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

43B(d) of the Act. However, assessee failed to find any favour from the Ld. Assessing Officer. As Ld. Assessing Officer making detailed observation as appearing at 45 to 52 of the assessment order dated 07.03.2014 denied the claim and made the addition of Rs.60,61,225/-. Ld. Assessing Officer also disallowed interest claim of Rs.24,47,865/-, since

M/S NEO SACK LTD vs. THE ACIT 4(2),

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing No

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

section is not a matter of right for the party who pleads the condonation but it depends on the discretion of the Court. The Court must be satisfied that the delay is caused due to a genuine reason. It is sufficiency of the cause which counts and not length of delay. 10. In view of the above legal position

M/S NEO SACK LTD. vs. THE ACIT 4(2),

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing No

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

section is not a matter of right for the party who pleads the condonation but it depends on the discretion of the Court. The Court must be satisfied that the delay is caused due to a genuine reason. It is sufficiency of the cause which counts and not length of delay. 10. In view of the above legal position

M/S SANGHVI FOODS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DIT /CPC , BENGELURU

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

68,290/-. While passing the order under Section 143(1) dated 16.03.2019 the DCIT, CPC Bangalore added amount of Rs. 93,18,775/- to the total income of the assessee company by making the addition / disallowance under Section 37 of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,43,561/- which was disallowed in computation of return of the assessee

JEHAN NUMA PALACE HOTEL PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT/ACIT,5(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

68,90,212/- is beyond the scope of\nadjustments provided in section 143(1)(a) of the Act.\n9.BECAUSE, the Intimation order dated 20.03.2017 passed by the Assessing\nOfficer (CPC) is a non-speaking order wherein the reason for the variance and\nfurther creation of demand was not explained, hence the same is liable to be\nquashed.\n10.BECAUSE

M/S. MANISH FILMS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ITO 3(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11

68 SOT 0110 (Pune). Ld. Counsel submitted that in the light of these decisions, the assessing officer ought not to have invoked the provisions of section 50C of the Act. 4. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. opposed both the submissions of the assessee and supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that the contention of [ITA 152/Ind/2015

RNG CONSTRUCTION CO,INDRA NAGAR vs. DCIT-CPC, CPC-BENGALURU

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshirng Construction Co. Dcit-Cpc बनाम/ 14, Sector-A, Vs. Indira Nagar, Mandideep (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaqfr9084B Assessee By Shri Yashwant Sharma, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025

68, and (b) disallowance of Rs. 5,26,439/- on account of Late GST fee (Rs. 1,000/-), Interest on VAT Tax (Rs. 53,779/-), Interest on TDS (Rs. 488/-), Penal damages (Rs. 1,27,540/-) and VAT Tax of 14-15 (Rs. 3,43,632/-). (iii) While the scrutiny-assessment was underway, the AO processed assessee’s return

SHRI VINOD KUMAR JAIN,RAISEN vs. THE ITO, VIDISHA

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Vinod Kumar Jain Ito R/O Mig 20 Patel Nagar Vs. Vidisha Mandideep Dist. Raisen (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Aaqpj8582Q Appellant By Shri P.D. Nagar, Ca Revenue By Shri V.J. Boricha Sr., Dr Date Of Hearing 14.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 28.01.2020 O R D E R

43B of the Act at Rs.25,977/- and disallowance of repair and maintenance expenses at Rs.25,000/-. Income assessed at Rs.41,81,646/-. Thereafter, the assessee challenged various additions made by the assessing officer before the Ld. CIT(A) but partly succeeded. 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising following grounds: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner

M/S M.P.WAREHOUSING & LOGISTIC CORPORATION,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S M.P. Warehousing Pr. Cit-1 & Logistic Corporation, Bhopal बनाम/ Office Complex, Block-1, Gautam Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aadcm 7742 B Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

68,42,720/-; (ii) Belated payment of provident funds amounting to Rs 3,92,64,279/- u/s 36(1)(va); (iii) Provision for payment of gratuity of Rs. 5,11,77,913/-; (iv) Payments of Rs. 5,76,70,528/- inadmissible u/s 43B; and (v) Provision for bad and doubtful debts