NIKHIL MOHINE,CHHINDWARA vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGULURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

d) or cl. (e) or cl. (f), which is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub- 5 ITA Nos. 37 & 38/Jab/2021 (AY 2018-19 & 2019-20) Nikhil Mohine v. Dy. CIT/Asst. DIT section (1) of s. 139 in respect of the previous year

NIKHIL MOHINE,PARASIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

d) or cl. (e) or cl. (f), which is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub- 5 ITA Nos. 37& 38/Jab/2021 (AY 2018-19& 2019-20) Nikhil Mohinev. Dy. CIT/Asst. DIT section (1) of s. 139 in respect of the previous year in which

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1(1), JABALPUR vs. SHRI DEEPAK SINGH BANAFER, JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue agitating the Order dated 30/09/2019 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur (‘CIT(A)’ for short), allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting his assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’, hereinafter) for Assessment Year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR vs. MADHYA PRADESH POWER GENERATING CO. LTD., JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

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

capital had been invested by the assessee in shares, stated to be purchased as a matter of business policy as an investment company, which had not yielded any dividend income for the relevant year. The claim, though confirmed for disallowance by the Tribunal, had been allowed by it for AY 2000-01, and admitted in appeal by the High Court

NARESH KUMAR GOLCHHA OFFICER ,KATNI vs. INCOME TAX WARD.1 , KATNI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri Naresh Kumar Golchha, Vs Ito, C/O-Samapat Lal & Sons, Ward-1, Raghunath Ganj, Katnia, Katni (M.P) Madhya Pradesh-483501. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Afhpg3398F Assessee By Shri H.S.Modh, Adv. Revenue By Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2023

D E R PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 08.03.2023 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] for assessment year 2013-14, raising following grounds: 1. “That the Ld NFAC, Delhi, has grossly erred in facts of the case to confirm

MANNULAL JAGANNATH DAS TRUST HOSPITAL,JABALPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Nrs Ganesan & Sanjay Arora

capital expenditure or repayment of loan/s by the assessee, considering which there is in fact net deficiency. (b) Without prejudice, surplus itself is no criteria for denial of approval u/s. 80G(5)(vi), which is to be in terms of rule 11AA, for which reference was made during hearing to CIT v. Rajmala Education Society

BASANT GROVER,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadalebasant Grover, Vs Ito, 245/2, Behind Ashoka Ward-2(3), Apartment, Madanmahal, Jabalpur. Jabalpur-482002 (M.P.) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adbpg3734F Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2023

D E R PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M.: The appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 08.08.2022 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] for assessment year 2013-14, raising following grounds: 1. “That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessment order passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), JABALPUR vs. SMT. SHEELA RANI JAIN, JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue‟s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue agitating the Order dated 09/07/2018 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur („CIT(A)‟, for short), allowing the Assessee‟s appeal contesting her assessment under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟ hereinafter), dated 27/02/2015

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE KATNI, KATNI vs. J.P TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD, DAMOH

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

D E R PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M.: These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the separate order, both dated 12.05.2023 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] for the assessment years 2016-17& 2017-18.The issues involved in both the appeals being common, therefore, both the appeals were heard

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-KATNI, KATNI vs. J.P. TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD, DAMOH

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

D E R PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M.: These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the separate order, both dated 12.05.2023 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] for the assessment years 2016-17& 2017-18.The issues involved in both the appeals being common, therefore, both the appeals were heard

J.P TOBACO PRODUCTA PVT. LTD.,DAMOH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - SAGAR, SAGASR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM:- The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the different orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Jabalpur dated 30.05.2016 & 26.03.2018. 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in this appeal is squarely covered in I.T.A. No.263/Jab/2016 Assessment Year:2012-13 2 assessee

J.P TOBACCO PRODUCT PVT. LTD.,DAMOH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, SAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM:- The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the different orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Jabalpur dated 30.05.2016 & 26.03.2018. 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in this appeal is squarely covered in I.T.A. No.263/Jab/2016 Assessment Year:2012-13 2 assessee

J.P TOBACCO PRODUCT PVT. LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM:- The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the different orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Jabalpur dated 30.05.2016 & 26.03.2018. 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in this appeal is squarely covered in I.T.A. No.263/Jab/2016 Assessment Year:2012-13 2 assessee

SUDEEP PANDYA L/H LLA JAYESH PANDEYA,CHHINDWARA vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesudeep Pandya L/H, Vs. Pr.Cit, Smt.Ila Jayesh Centralrevenuebuilding, Pandya, Napier Town, 14-15 Patni Jabalpur-482002, Complex, Madhya Pradesh. Parasiya Road, Chhindwara-480001 Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Ahkpp7408G Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri G.N Purohit.Sr.Adv & Smt.Uma Parashar. Adv.Ar Respondent By : Shri Saad Kidwai.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit) Jabalpur Passed U/Sec 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Sudeep Pandya L/H Ila Jayesh Pandya Jabalpur. 1 The Learned Pcit Has Erred In Law & On Facts Of The Case In Passing An Order Under Section 263 Against A Dead Person, The Notice Of Hearing Where Issued In The Name Of Deceased & Were Not Served On The Legal Here The Order Passed Under Section 263 Is Illegal Without Jurisdiction & Void Ab-Intio Same Should Be Placed Into Toto.

d) - Any other item of income to the tune of Rs.94,268/- and column number 16(e) Capital receipts, if any to the tune of Rs.23,59,545/-. 8.3 Astonishingly no substantial amount has not been credited to Profit & Loss Account and thereby has not been reported as income and resultantly remained to be taxed in the hands

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. TARUN DEVCON PRIVATE LIMITED, JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenues’ appeal is dismissed in terms of the foregoing

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Arora

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for assessment year (AY) 2015- 16 vide order dated 26.12.2017. 1 | P a g e Dy. CIT vs. Tarun Devcon (P.) Ltd. 2.1 The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee, a private limited company in the business of real estate development, having its’ registered

AMBIKA CHARAN DIXIT,JABALPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S.:J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of learned Pr. CIT, Jabalpur-1 dated 19/03/2021 pertaining to assessment year 2015-16 passed u/s 263 of the Act. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: “1. The learned PCIT has erred

SHRI BHAGCHAND JAIN,JABALPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, JABALPUR

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur (‘CIT(A)’, for short) dated 06/09/2016, partly allowing his appeal contesting his assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 vide order dated

SHRI. NARSINGH RANGA,JABALPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Narsingh Ranga Dcit, Circle-2(1) V. Sharda Chowk, Nagpur Road, Aaykar Bhawan, Napier Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh- Town, Jabalpur, Madhya 482001. Pradesh-482001. Pan:Acmpr1917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sanjay Seth, Ca Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 06 2025 O R D E R

11 06 2025 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 18.11.2024 pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. That on the facts