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.

1. Income/Capital gain on sale of land or building 2. Income from real estate business 3. Sundry creditors 4. Large increase in sundry creditors with respect to turnover as compared to preceding year 5. Large increase in sundry creditors and reduction in business income as compared to preceding year 6. Low Capital gain with respect to sale consideration (higher

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

1,56,603/- is not a part of statutory dues nor an\nexpenditure; which is in the nature of tax, duty, cess or fee to which provisions\nof section 43B of I.T. Act, 1961 could be invoked.\n5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition of Rs.14,21,215/-\nassessed under the head income from other sources

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

1,56,603/- is not a part of statutory dues nor an\nexpenditure; which is in the nature of tax, duty, cess or fee to which provisions\nof section 43B of I.T. Act, 1961 could be invoked.\n5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition of Rs.14,21,215/-\nassessed under the head income from other sources

RITA MANCHANI,JABALPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.18,41,770/- by making I.T.A. No.60/JAB/2024 Assessment Year:2013-14 2 addition of Rs.5,53,428/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal in the office of learned CIT(A). Vide impugned