JAI PRAKASH NARAYAN SHARMA,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

price of new property Rs.99,48,000 + subsequent\nexpenses of additional work Rs.26,54,377) but the AO allowed exemption\nonly of purchase cost of Rs.99,48,000/- and disallowed exemption qua the\ncost of additional work.\n4.\nAggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal whereupon the\nCIT(A) granted part relief by passing following order:\n“In considered

SHRI DR. LIYAKAT ALI KAPADIYA,UJJAIN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 (1), UJJAIN

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borada.Y. 2013-14

1-4-2003 and it is in the nature of special provision which is introduced in determining the full value of the consideration in case of transfer of land or building or both. The value determined or assessed by any authority of the State Government for purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect, of such registration

M/S MALVIKA AGROTECH PVT. LTD.,DHAR vs. THE ITO-2(2), INDORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes”

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Malvika Agrotech Ito, 2(2), Pvt. Ltd, Indore Plot No.185, Sector-1, Pithampur, Dhar (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aaccm6451G Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri C.P. Rawka,Ca Date Of Hearing 10.09.2018 Date Of 19.9.2018 Pronouncement

1-4-2003 and it is in the nature of special provision which is introduced in determining the full value of the consideration in case of transfer of land or building or both. The value determined or assessed by any authority of the State Government for purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect, of such registration of conveyance deed

HASSANAND KHEMLANI,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1 ,INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

50C (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed for assessable] by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the "stamp valuation authority") for the purpose of payment

KALPANA JAIN,INDORE vs. THE PR CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

50C (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed for assessable] by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the "stamp valuation authority") for the purpose of payment

BIHARILAL,HOSHANGABAD vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NFAC-DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2018-19 Assessment Unit Of Income- Biharilal, Tax Department S/O Gaurishankar, 508, Ward No. 15, बनाम/ Shobhapur, Vs. Hoshangabad (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Eonpb2765E Assessee By Ms. Saniya Farhaz Memon, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026

transfer of land and in the ITR filed by the appellant in response to notice issued u/s 148. Ground5. The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in passing the assessment order without applying the provisions of Section 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the valuation of the property. The Ld. AO has failed to consider the provisions allowing

SHRI SANJAY DUBEY,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 1 (2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assesse in ITANo

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

transfer of immovable property by the bank against the liability of third party which is upheld by the ld. CIT(A) is arbitrary erroneous and unjustified. Page 1 of 6 ITA No.141& 142/Ind/2023 Sanjay Dubey Page 2 of 6 2. That the Ld. Lower authority as erred in making addition of Rs.15,58,000/- by invoking the provisions u/s 50C

SHRI SANJAY DUBEY,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 1 (2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assesse in ITANo

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

transfer of immovable property by the bank against the liability of third party which is upheld by the ld. CIT(A) is arbitrary erroneous and unjustified. Page 1 of 6 ITA No.141& 142/Ind/2023 Sanjay Dubey Page 2 of 6 2. That the Ld. Lower authority as erred in making addition of Rs.15,58,000/- by invoking the provisions u/s 50C

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAJEEV AJMERA, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Co No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Dcit-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Assessee By Shri Mahendra Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 आदेश/ O R D E R

transferred to his account through normal banking channel. Thus the view taken by the CIT(A) on appreciation of the facts is a possible view.” 7.4 The appellant had received commission / brokerage from three parties and also submitted the copy of the said Page 5 of 17 Shri Rajeev Ajmera ITA No.51/Ind/2018& CO.No.23/Ind/2018 Assessment year 2010-11 transaction during

SMT. CHANDRAVATI KAITHWAS,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO-1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2008-09

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Learned lower authorities is vitiated on several grounds, hence the same may kindly be quashed. 2. That the order passed is illegal, unlawful and opposed to provisions of law. 3. That the learned Assessing Officer erred and was not justified in reopening the assessment

SHRI ASHOK KUMAR KAITHWAS,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO-1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2008-09

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Learned lower authorities is vitiated on several grounds, hence the same may kindly be quashed. 2. That the order passed is illegal, unlawful and opposed to provisions of law. 3. That the learned Assessing Officer erred and was not justified in reopening the assessment

SHRI NARENDRA TRIPATHI,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT-CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

transfer by an assessee”. Thus the provision of Section 50C is primarily applicable on the seller of the property. There is no evidence on record which could show that the Ld. A.O carried out any investigation against the seller or took his/her statement or whether any addition has been made in the hands of the seller for the alleged amount

M/S BHOOMIYAJI LAND & FINANCE CO.,DEWAS vs. THE ITO, DEWAS

In the result ground No.3& 4 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07

transferred to other accounts. Considering the above facts and finding of the Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench, Indore the addition made by the AO at Rs. 89,99,500/- is not sustainable and it is hereby deleted. 3.3.8 Considering the above facts addition made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,35,15,500/- (and net addition

THE DCIT, 1(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S. BHOOMIYAJI LAND & FINANCE LTD., DEWAS

In the result ground No.3& 4 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07

transferred to other accounts. Considering the above facts and finding of the Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench, Indore the addition made by the AO at Rs. 89,99,500/- is not sustainable and it is hereby deleted. 3.3.8 Considering the above facts addition made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,35,15,500/- (and net addition

THE DCIT, 1(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S BHOOMIYAJI LAND & FINANCE CO.,, DEWAS

In the result ground No.3& 4 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07

transferred to other accounts. Considering the above facts and finding of the Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench, Indore the addition made by the AO at Rs. 89,99,500/- is not sustainable and it is hereby deleted. 3.3.8 Considering the above facts addition made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,35,15,500/- (and net addition

M/S BHOMIYAJI LAND & FINANCE CO.,DEWAS vs. THE ACIT 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result ground No.3& 4 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07

transferred to other accounts. Considering the above facts and finding of the Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench, Indore the addition made by the AO at Rs. 89,99,500/- is not sustainable and it is hereby deleted. 3.3.8 Considering the above facts addition made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,35,15,500/- (and net addition

THE DCIT, 1(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S. BHOOMIYAJI LAND & FINANCE CO.,, DEWAS

In the result ground No.3& 4 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07

transferred to other accounts. Considering the above facts and finding of the Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench, Indore the addition made by the AO at Rs. 89,99,500/- is not sustainable and it is hereby deleted. 3.3.8 Considering the above facts addition made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,35,15,500/- (and net addition

THE DCIT, 1(1), UJJAIN vs. M/S. BHOOMIYAJI LAND & FINANCE CO.,, DEWAS

In the result ground No.3& 4 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07

transferred to other accounts. Considering the above facts and finding of the Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench, Indore the addition made by the AO at Rs. 89,99,500/- is not sustainable and it is hereby deleted. 3.3.8 Considering the above facts addition made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,35,15,500/- (and net addition