THE ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. M/S. SUNDERDEEP CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result all the grounds raised by the Revenue are

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

68 of the Act at Rs.2,76,42,000/- 1. Prior to the impugned year, assessee had given advances through banking channel to various parties for purchase of land. Assessee submits that as the advances were given through banking channel this itself proves the genuineness of the initiation of transaction. 2. Assessee contends that the funds transferred or given

PIYUSH JAIN,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-4(4), INDORE , ITO, INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

87,597\n2017-18\n38,80,68,899\n2018-19\nThe assessee formed a limited\nliability partnership firm and became\npartner in the said firm.\n8.\nHe further submitted that the rejection of cash book u/s 145(3) and application\nof section

SHRI SHYAMLAL GOYAL,SENDHWA vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL,CIRCLE -2, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 247/Ind/2021 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

87,295/- है । इस "कार नगद रा"श ". 2,68,555/- अ"धक "ा"त हुआ है । इस अ"धक रा"श को कृपया "प"ट कर" । उ"तर- सर, अंतर क" रा"श ". 2,68,555/- को "प"ट करने म" असमथ" हूँ । इसके साथ ह" म" इस रा"श को म" चालू "व"त वष" क" अघो"षत आय

SHRI AASHISH MANGAL,BARWANI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 247/Ind/2021 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

87,295/- है । इस "कार नगद रा"श ". 2,68,555/- अ"धक "ा"त हुआ है । इस अ"धक रा"श को कृपया "प"ट कर" । उ"तर- सर, अंतर क" रा"श ". 2,68,555/- को "प"ट करने म" असमथ" हूँ । इसके साथ ह" म" इस रा"श को म" चालू "व"त वष" क" अघो"षत आय

SHRI LOKESH MANGAL,BARWANI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL,CIRCLE-2, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 247/Ind/2021 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

87,295/- है । इस "कार नगद रा"श ". 2,68,555/- अ"धक "ा"त हुआ है । इस अ"धक रा"श को कृपया "प"ट कर" । उ"तर- सर, अंतर क" रा"श ". 2,68,555/- को "प"ट करने म" असमथ" हूँ । इसके साथ ह" म" इस रा"श को म" चालू "व"त वष" क" अघो"षत आय

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S. CENTURE 21 MALL PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 68 sustaining/enhancing by observing that excess expenditure on the amount account of cost of Century 21 Malls P.Ltd Vs. ACIT (Indore Bench) – (9 Cross-Appeals) 29 belongs to Shri construction Keshav Nanchani determined by the DVO. 2009-10 Rs.20,04,41,842/- 7,03,97,955 Rs.1,99,42,216/- to Rs.2,60,39,729/- 2010-11 Rs.14

THE DCIT-2(1), INDORE vs. M/S. CENTURY 21 MALL (P) LTD., INDORE

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 68 sustaining/enhancing by observing that excess expenditure on the amount account of cost of Century 21 Malls P.Ltd Vs. ACIT (Indore Bench) – (9 Cross-Appeals) 29 belongs to Shri construction Keshav Nanchani determined by the DVO. 2009-10 Rs.20,04,41,842/- 7,03,97,955 Rs.1,99,42,216/- to Rs.2,60,39,729/- 2010-11 Rs.14

M/S CENTURY 21 MALLS P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 68 sustaining/enhancing by observing that excess expenditure on the amount account of cost of Century 21 Malls P.Ltd Vs. ACIT (Indore Bench) – (9 Cross-Appeals) 29 belongs to Shri construction Keshav Nanchani determined by the DVO. 2009-10 Rs.20,04,41,842/- 7,03,97,955 Rs.1,99,42,216/- to Rs.2,60,39,729/- 2010-11 Rs.14

SHRI VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE PR.CIT-1, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

87,000/- and the additions included the addition made for alleged income from Vyapam scam. Ld. PCIT after assuming the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act has observed that the order of the Ld. A.O is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and needs to be assessed afresh after making proper enquiries

DR. VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CIR. 2(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

87,000/- and the additions included the addition made for alleged income from Vyapam scam. Ld. PCIT after assuming the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act has observed that the order of the Ld. A.O is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and needs to be assessed afresh after making proper enquiries

DR. VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT CIR. 2(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

87,000/- and the additions included the addition made for alleged income from Vyapam scam. Ld. PCIT after assuming the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act has observed that the order of the Ld. A.O is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and needs to be assessed afresh after making proper enquiries

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received from M/s SKS Ispat and Power Limited. Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 20. Before us, the Ld. CIt-DR vehemently supported the order of Ld. AO. Per contra Ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the findings

THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received from M/s SKS Ispat and Power Limited. Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 20. Before us, the Ld. CIt-DR vehemently supported the order of Ld. AO. Per contra Ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the findings

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received from M/s SKS Ispat and Power Limited. Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 20. Before us, the Ld. CIt-DR vehemently supported the order of Ld. AO. Per contra Ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the findings

THEDCIT 1(1) , INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S AD-MANUM FINANCE LTD., INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2011-12

87,500/- received from ADPL by the assessee company namely Ad-Manum Finance Ltd. and also deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Act made for unsecured loan of Rs.2,05,00,614/- received from M/s. Aereo Ad-Manum Finance & Anr ITA No.01 & 03/Ind/2020 & C.O.No.01&02/Ind/2020 Dealcomm Private Limited, Rs.5,72,43,488/- received from M/s Chamak Trexim Private

M/S RELIABLE GLOBAL VENTURE P LTD,BHOPAL vs. ITO 4 (1) ,BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

87,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Act has been confirmed by the First

SARITA BAGDI ,INDORE vs. THE ITO WARD-4(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2011-12

section 68 - On appeal, Tribunal deleted addition observing that DMAT account and contract note showed credit/details of share transactions; - Whether on facts, transactions in shares were rightly held to be genuine and addition made by Assessing Officer was rightly deleted - Held, yes From the above cited decisions in the favor of the assessee, it is clear that the assesee

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

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 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