SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL ,SATNA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX CIRCLE, SATNA

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Kumar Agarwal V. Acit Circle Satna Blooms Campus, Nh-75, Panna Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Road, Satna (Mp)-485001. Lines, Satna, Mp-485001. Tan/Pan:Ackpa2596H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sanjay Mishra, Adv Respondent By: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. Dr-1 Date Of Hearing: 19 08 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21 08 2025 O R D E R

natural justice 3. That, there was sufficient reasons due to which the assessee could not appear before the first appellant authority before passing the order dated 11.09.2024. 4 That, the Ld. First appellate authority is totally unjustified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 8153072/- on account of additions made under various heads. Page 2 of 8 5 Under the facts

SAURABH SINGHAI L/H LATE SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN,SAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3 SAGAR, SAGAR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon‟Ble

natural justice. While the Commissioner is free to exercise his jurisdiction on consideration of all relevant facts, a full opportunity to controvert them and to explain the circumstances surrounding such facts, as may be considered relevant by the assessee, must be afforded to him by the Commissioner prior to the finalisation of the decision.‟ Reference in this context may also

RAJENDRA SINGH BAGGA,DAMOH vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, KATNI

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

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Rajendra Singh Bagga, 15 43, Tandon Vs. National Faceless Assessment Bagicha, College Road, Gayatri Nagar, Centre, Delhi [Jurisdiction Damoh, M.P. Officer-Acit Katni-Circle, Katni Pan:Adgpb8418G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, Fca Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 14.10.2024 Whereby Learned Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Orders Of The Learned Ao Under Section 147 Read With Section 144 Dated 30.03.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Are Under:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Passing Ex- Party Order Without Providing Adequate Opportunity As Only Three Dates For Hearing Were Fixed & That Too In The Peak Periods Of Filling Of Tax Audits, Income Tax Returns & Accordingly Assessee Was Busy In Filling His Audit Report /Itr & Had Seeked Adjournment Also In This Regard. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Cit (A) Erred In Confirming Addition Of 6 Lacs Under Section 68, When Ao Himself Admitting In The Assessment Order That The Difference Of 5% 'Was Applicable As Allowable Difference Between Circle Rate & Actual Rate Of Purchase Of Property. Hence Forth The Addition Of Rs 6 Lacs Should Have Been Deleted By Ao.

natural justice and henceforth the addition of Rs 6 lacs should have been deleted by AO. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case CIT (A) erred in confirming addition of Rs 6 lacs under section 69 of the act as AO made two contradictory statements in assessment order ie one being that sum of Rs. 26 lacs paid

NARENDRA AGRAWAL,JABALPUR vs. ITO-WARD 1 (2),, JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 25 & 26/Jab/2023 (A.Y: 2012-13 & 2016-17) Narendra Agrawal, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), 932, Wright Town, Annexe Building, Jabalpur 482001, Aayakar Bhavan, Madhyapradesh. Jabalpur, Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Adopa3476D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Sapanusrethe, Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / Cit(A) & Passed The Order U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate

INDIAN SOCIETY OF WEED SCIENCE,JABALPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXCEMPTION), BHOPAL

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: Na Indian Society Of Weed V. Commissioner Of Income Science Tax (Exemption) Icar-Dwr Campus, Bhopal Maharajpur, Adhartal, Jabalpur-482004. Pan:Aaaai7305R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Shravan Kumar Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 12 02 2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 19 02 2026 O R D E R

TDS compliances by the assessee.” 2. Assessee has made substantial amount of expenditure towards the objects and assessee has not submitted any proof or evidence of activities. Thus, it is clear that the assessee has not commenced its activities towards the attainment of the objects. 2. Section 12AB(1)(b)(i & ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is reproduced

SUDHIR CHANDRA DATT,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesudhir Chandra Datt, Vs. Ito, Circle – 2(1), 1148A, Napier Town, Aaykar Bhavan, Jabalpur-482001, Napier Town, Madhyapradesh. Jabalpur-482001, Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Acspd5225E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Sanjayseth.Ca & Shri.Sachinbajpai,Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shivkumar.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / Cit(A) & Passed The Order U/Sec 143(3) & 250 Of The Act.

TDS and they are penal in nature and cannot be allowed as business expenditure and the same was disallowed of Rs. 19,550/- (ii) The AO found that the assessee has debited the expenses in respect of salary and Sudhir Chandra Datt, Jabalpur. wages for wine business of Rs. 34,20,000/- and salary and wages for Builders business

PUNJAB HOUSE,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Punjab House V. Income Tax Officer, 1, Star Complex, Opp Dominos, Ward-2(1) Jyoti Talkies Road, Napier Town Annexe Building, Aayakar Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh- Bhawan, Napier Town, 482001. Jabalpur-Madhya Pradesh-482001. Pan: Aaqfp3056R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri G. N. Purohit, Sr. Advocate. Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18 09 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2025 O R D E R

TDS and Entry Challan under Rule 46A hen this contention could have been very well entertained on the principles of natural justice

BIRLA CABLE LIMITED,REWA vs. ACIT,CPC-TDS, BHOPAL

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

justice. Accordingly, we are inclined to direct the ld. CIT(A) to give an opportunity to the assessee for 2 Birla Cable Ltd. vs Astt. CIT, CPC-TDS filing two separate appeals, and hear the same in case the assessee files two separate appeals within 30 days of this order. The assessee, in filing a single appeal against two separate

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER , CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE ,JABALPUR vs. ITO (TDS)-2, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Natural Justice as no opportunity of hearing was granted while passing the impugned order. 5. That the sub section (3) of the Section 234E of the Act states that it shall be paid before delivering a TDS

SUPREME TRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HARYANA BHAWAN vs. DCIT, KATNI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Supreme Tractors Pvt Ltd V. Dcit Katni, Madhya Pradesh 483501. Katni, Madhya Pradesh- 483501. Pan:Aajcs4013M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sahil Gupta, Advocate Respondent By: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. Dr-1 Date Of Hearing: 12 02 2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 27 02 2026 O R D E R

TDS deducted during the year was 280,450, resulting in a net tax liability of ₹14,69,395. The interest liability for the year under various provisions is as follows: 234A on 214,69,395 @ 1% for 6 months: Rs.88,158 234B on 14,69,395 @ 1% for 12 months: ₹1,76,316 Total interest payable

PRATH KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,LAMKANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Prath Krishi Sakh Sahakari V. Ito Ward-1(3) Samiti Maryadit Lamkana Annexe Building, Aayakar 01, Manjholi Jabalpur, Bhawan, Napier Town, Lamkana-483110. Jabalpur-482001. Pan:Aacap1804G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 22 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

TDS was also deducted and it is duly reflecting in the Form 26AS and duly shown in the ITR and it was disallowed on frivolous grounds. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC was not justified in confirming the action of AO with regard to the deduction claimed by the appellant under section 80P of the Act without

VISHAL DATT,JABALPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE2(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudhary

TDS had been deducted on payment. In case of labour charges there are very few instances where receiver signature were not found due-to the reason that the amount was collected by the mukaddam i.e. head of the group of labourer same ‘were explained to the AO but he had not accepted and made the adhoc disallowance against the order

VISHAL DATT,JABALPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1) , JABALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

TDS\nhad been deducted on payment. In case of labour charges there are very\nfew instances where receiver signature were not found due-to the reason\nthat the amount was collected by the mukaddam i.e. head of the group of\nlabourer same 'were explained to the AO but he had not accepted and\nmade the adhoc disallowance against the order

VISHAL DATT,JABLPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudhary

TDS had been deducted on payment. In case of labour charges there are very few instances where receiver signature were not found due-to the reason that the amount was collected by the mukaddam i.e. head of the group of labourer same ‘were explained to the AO but he had not accepted and made the adhoc disallowance against the order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA vs. M/S. RAM KUMAR SURESH KUMAR, SATNA

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gaaleasst. Commissioner Of Vs Shri Ram Kumar Income Tax, Circle-Satna, Suresh Kumar, Satna Birla Road, Satna (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaffr3899D Revenue By Shri Shravan Kumar Gotru, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri Rahul Bardia, Fca Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2023 O R D E R Per Om Prakash Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 12.03.2018 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Jabalpur [In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year 2013-14, Raising Following Grounds:

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE ,JABALPUR vs. CPC-TDS, KARNATAK

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleoffice Of The District Vs. Cpc-Tds & Session Judge, Centralrevenuebuilding, Districtcourtbuillding, Income Tax Square, Omti,Jabalpur4820001, Napier Town, Madhya Pradesh. Jabalpur-482001, Madhya Pradesh. Tan No. : Jbpo00349G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rajeev Nema. Adv & Shri S.K Yadav. Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac)Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 200A(1) & U/Sec250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

TDS returns/statements and levied Late Fees u/sec 234E of the Act for Q-1 Rs. 24,000, Q-2 Rs. 45,800/- Q-3 Rs. 45,800/- and Q-4 Rs.36,800/- all four Quarters aggregating to Rs.1,52,400/- and passed the separate orders u/s 200A of the Act dated 18-11-2014.The assessee has also filed rectification petition U/sec154

SWETA GOENKA,JABALPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMR TAX-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

natural justice (para 9 of the impugned order). 3.4 The issue, it needs to be appreciated, is primarily factual. The assessee admittedly following mercantile system of accounting, the credit to her account for full contract amount by the Nagar Panchayats (contractees) indicates the completion of the relevant contract/s. Where so, the entire amount so credited, is, irrespective of the assessee

RUCHI MAHILA MANDAL,CHHATARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHHATARPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

TDS 1 | P a g e ITA No.194/JAB/20198 (A.Y. 2010-11) Ruchi Mahila Mandal vs. ITO was deducted by the contractor/supplier under section 194C of the Act and as per 26AS data a system generated notice was issued to the assessee-appellant on 14-03-2015 and 12-08-2015 for filing the return. The assessee-appellant did not file

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 vs. M/S RPJ MINERALS PRIVATE LTD., SATNA

In the result, ITA No.154/JAB/2016 is held to be allowed for statistical\npurposes while ITA No

TDS of Rs.\n50,0000/- have been deposited before the due date of the filing of the return, he gave\nrelief for the same and added back an amount of Rs. 24,91,229/- under section 43B of\nthe Act.\n6. Aggrieved with the said addition, the assessee took note of the matter to the ld.\nCIT(A), NFAC