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

disallowed Rs.30,77,800.00 out of cash deposits in bank during the demonetization period on the pretext and notion and disregarding

SHRI GOVIND RATHI, PROP. GOVIND DALL MILL,HOSHANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE ITARSI, ITARSI

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

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 Govind Rathi, Dy. Cit, Vs. Circle – Itarsi, Prop: Govind Dall Mill

deposits in the account of Giriraj Rathi just before giving unsecured loans. Furnish cash flow statements of the lenders. 6…… 6 Govind Rathi v. Dy. CIT Next date of hearing fixed on 15/2/2015.’ It thus stands clarified that the date of the assessment order is not ‘13.2.2015’. Further, and more importantly, i.e., in the context of the case

PAWAN YADAV, CHHINDWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1, CHHINDWARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

cash deposit disallowance is liable to be quashed. 1.2 That Ld. A.O. has failed to consider that cash deposits have

BARNALI SAMANTA,JABALPUR vs. ITO WARD2(5), JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

cash deposit of Rs.4,50,000/- therefore, order sustaining the said addition deserves to be set aside. Further submitted that the learned Assessing Officer has travelled beyond the jurisdiction of the limited scrutiny in contravention of CBDT Instruction No.7/2014 dated 26/09/2014 therefore, calls for the intervention of this Tribunal. 3. Per contra, learned D.R., relying on the order of learned

PRATHMIK KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT ,JERATH vs. INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD , NARSINGHPUR

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2019-20 Prathmik Krishi Sakh V. Ito Ward Narsinghpur Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Income Tax Office, Jerath Trimurti Nagar, Housing Gram Jerath, Pathariya, Board Colony, Damoh-470661. Narsinghpur-487001. Pan:Aabap7893E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing: 20 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

cash deposits of Rs.5,89,76,696/-; made contract payments of Rs.1,40,392/-; made commission payments of Rs.3,88,381/- and received interest of Rs.12,695/- but not filed any income tax return for the year under consideration. Accordingly, after following the necessary procedure a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. However, the assessee did not make

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- SATNA vs. SHRI JAMMU BEG,

In the result, the levy of penalty is cancelled and the appeal of the appellant is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit, Vs. Shri Jammu Beg, Satna, M/S Mirza Transport, Madhya Pradesh. Main Road, Waidhan, Singrauli. Madhya Pradesh.

cash deposit to the extent of Rs. 1,10,28,980/- as shown in the books of account of the assessee was in clear violation of provision of Sec. 269SS of the Act and penalty to the extent should have been confirmed. 3. That the appellant reserves the right to amend/alter any of the grounds of appeal/add other grounds

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) , JABALPUR vs. M/S. JABALPUR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTER, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit, Vs. Jabalpur Hospital & Central Circle, Researchcentre,Pvtltd Ramnath Russel Crossing, Building,Napier Town, Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001, Jabalpur-482001 Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj1959K Appellant .. Respondent Co.No.04/Jab/2019 (A.Y. 2016-17) (In Ita No.19/Jab/2019) Jabalpur Hospital & Vs. Dcit, Research Centre Pvt Ltd, Central Circle, Russel Crossing, Ramnath Napier Town, Building,Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001. Jabalpur-482001. Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj1959K Appellant .. Respondent

depositing its full available cash in bank but is keeping part of the cash to meet out any contingency For this reason the average cash balance of the assessee from 1.04.2017 to 30.09.2017 is around Rs40 lacs The minimum closing cash balance in this period was Rs9,49,478/- and maximum closing cash balance was 1,00,54,201/-Even

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. ANAND MINING CORPORATION, JABALPUR

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

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

cash, the provision of section 40A(3) is applicable and in our considered opinion, the CIT(A) committed no error in sustaining the disallowance of Rs.20,195/- and we find no merit in the ground No. 1 of the C.O. of the assessee. 39. Ground No. 2 of the Cross Objection is against the confirmation of disallowance of Rs.2

M/S AMBAJEE JEWELLERS JABALPUR,JABALPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JABALPUR-1,, JABALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Nikhil Choudhary

cash deposits during the demonetization period as compared to pre demonetization period. Subsequently, the assessment was completed on an assessed income of Rs.2,66,90,289/- after making an addition of Rs.2,12,82,278/- on account of allegedly bogus sales u/s. 68 of the Act. The learned PCIT called for the records of the case and observed from

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

deposit of TDS without quoting under which section its being disallowed. 9 Considering the fact that assessee paid Rs. 2,40,000/as consultancy fee and Rs. 4,00,000/- as salary to his daughter — Sumedha Agrawal who is well qualified in MBA and giving her valuable service to the assessee for his business. Ld. CIT (A) erred in disallowing amount

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

cash loans and loans for seeds and fertilizers. It had maintained statutory books of accounts, which were audited by the Auditors of the Cooperative Society, but its claim for deduction under section 80P had been disallowed by the ld. AO in an ex parte order. The assessee Society functions in a remote area and all the Members of the assessee

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

cash loans and loans for seeds and fertilizers. It had maintained statutory books of accounts, which were audited by the Auditors of the Cooperative Society, but its claim for deduction under section 80P had been disallowed by the ld. AO in an ex parte order. The assessee Society functions in a remote area and all the Members of the assessee

ALKA JAIN,SEONI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, CHHINDWARA

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

disallowing the Compensation to Employees and Tanker Running Expenditure ignoring the documentary evidences including Ledger Accounts, Bills etc. produced on record. 3The Ld. CIT(A) erred in facts in alleging that the assessee could not submit documents and evidences to substantiate its claim of tanker running and vehicle expenses on the contrary the assessee furnished Bills, Ledger Accounts Details among

RAJ KUMAR KHATIK,SAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, SAGAR, SAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadaleraj Kumar Khatik, Vs Ito, Fresh Vegetable Commission Ward-3, Sagar Agent, Sabji Mandi, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh-470002. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Cefpk7387R Assessee By Shri Dhiraj Ghai, Fca Revenue By Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2023

cash was deposited in saving account but no return of income was filed, so assessment was re-opened invoking provision of section 147 of the Act. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) issued a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act alongwith questionnaire on 20.09.2017, fixing the case for hearing on 27.09.2017, but neither anyone

ARIHANT AUTOMOBILE ,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalearihant Automobiles Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2) 984, Wright Town, Jabalpur Jabalpur-482002, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfa2701P Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement .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/S 143(1)And 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

deposited before filling of Income Tax return. (3) The appellate craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above ground of appeal 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of automobiles. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2018-19 disclosing a a total income

M/S.ASIT DIXIT,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD2(2), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year : 2005-06 Asit Dixit, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-2(2), Jabalpur (M.P.) Jabalpur [Pan: Aanfm 5798A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sanjay Seth, Ca Respondent By Sh. S.K. Halder, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 07/10/2021

deposit Rs. 1000 or 2000 (say) from his monthly salary, i.e., assuming so, withdrawing or retaining the balance in cash for meeting his household/day-to-day expenses. The explanation, totally un-evidenced, accordingly fails on all fours. There is in fact no explanation, i.e., in the eyes of law. That adjudication by any authority, including the Tribunal, the final fact-finding body

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

disallowance in respect of the employees’ contribution to the employees’ provident fund and the employees’ state insurance fund, on account of the same having been deposited (by the assessee-employer) beyond the due dates for the deposit thereof under the 1 ITA Nos. 37& 38/Jab/2021 (AY 2018-19& 2019-20) Nikhil Mohinev. Dy. CIT/Asst. DIT relevant statute. The assessee

NIKHIL MOHINE,CHHINDWARA vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGULURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

disallowance in respect of the employees’ contribution to the employees’ provident fund and the employees’ state insurance fund, on account of the same having been deposited (by the assessee-employer) beyond the due dates for the deposit thereof under the 1 ITA Nos. 37 & 38/Jab/2021 (AY 2018-19 & 2019-20) Nikhil Mohine v. Dy. CIT/Asst. DIT relevant statute. The assessee