INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, CHHINDWARA vs. M. P. RASTRIYA KOYLA KHADAN MAJDOOR SANGH COLLIERY EMPLOYEE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY, CHHINDWARA

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 disallowance, since deleted in first appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur (‗CIT(A)‘, for short) vide his order dated 08/07/2020 in respect of the assessee‘s assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‗the Act‘ hereinafter

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 12.09.2018, partly allowing the assessee's appeal disputing the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for Assessment

RAI SAHAB BHAIYALAL DUBEY EDUCATIONAL AND MEDICAL CHARITABLE TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

disallowed while processing the return under section 143(1) of the Act. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Accordingly, all the grounds taken by the assessee in the appeal

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)

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These three appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dismissing the appeals against the orders of the ld. AO under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed

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)

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These three appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dismissing the appeals against the orders of the ld. AO under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed

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

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 11.09.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- SEONI, SEONI vs. JILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT, SEONI

In the result, all the Appeals and CO (# 7/2018) are allowed for statistical purposes, and CO (# 5/2018) is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

d) "scheduled bank" shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (ii) of the Explanation to clause (viia) of sub-section (1) of section 36; (e) – (f) … (g) "co-operative bank", "primary agricultural credit society" and "primary co- operative agricultural and rural development bank" shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the Explanation to sub-section (4

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- SEONI, SEONI vs. JILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT, SEONI

In the result, all the Appeals and CO (# 7/2018) are allowed for statistical purposes, and CO (# 5/2018) is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

d) "scheduled bank" shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (ii) of the Explanation to clause (viia) of sub-section (1) of section 36; (e) – (f) … (g) "co-operative bank", "primary agricultural credit society" and "primary co- operative agricultural and rural development bank" shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the Explanation to sub-section (4

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- SEONI, SEONI vs. JILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT, SEONI

In the result, all the Appeals and CO (# 7/2018) are allowed for statistical purposes, and CO (# 5/2018) is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

d) "scheduled bank" shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (ii) of the Explanation to clause (viia) of sub-section (1) of section 36; (e) – (f) … (g) "co-operative bank", "primary agricultural credit society" and "primary co- operative agricultural and rural development bank" shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the Explanation to sub-section (4

M/S. VALLABH MARKET,GADARWARA vs. PR. CIT-1, , JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is partly allowed

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

D E R Per Manomohan Das, JM: This is an Appeal by the assessee against the revisional order by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax ( „Pr. CIT‟, in short), dated 29-03-2021 under section 263(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the “Act” hereinafter) for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. There was delay of 5 days

MEHROTRA BUILDCON PVT.LTD,SATNA vs. ASSTT.COMMISSINOR OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE , SATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY 2017-

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

4. That section 36(1)(va) and section 43B and conflicting and ambiguous. The conflict should be resolved in favor of the assessee. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds the CPC and CIT Appeal is not justified in disallowing the employers contribution that is covered by section43(B). The disallowance of employers contribution may please be allowed

MEHROTRA BUILDCON PVT.LTD,SATNA vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIR , SATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY 2017-

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

4. That section 36(1)(va) and section 43B and conflicting and ambiguous. The conflict should be resolved in favor of the assessee. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds the CPC and CIT Appeal is not justified in disallowing the employers contribution that is covered by section43(B). The disallowance of employers contribution may please be allowed

RAMJIDAS BUDHRAJA CHARITABLE TRUST (SGM),CHHINDWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

4. The attention of your good self is invited to Section 12A(2) of the Act. Sub- section (2) of Section 12A reads as under:- I.T.A. No.235/JAB/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 10 "(2) Where an application has been made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in relation

M/S NARSINGH EXTRACTION & ALLIED PRODUCTS P. LTD,JABALPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Narsingh Extraction & Vs Asst.Cit, Allied Products P.Ltd., Circle-2(1), 389, Gupteshwar Ward, Jabalpur Madan Mahal, Jabalpur. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn2387H Assessee By Shri Neeraj Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri Saad Kidwai, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 20/09/2023 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 19.10.2022 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] for assessment year 2014-15, raising following grounds: 1. “The learned CIT(Appeal) erred in disposing of appeal without considering the grounds of appeal

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS , GHAZIABAB

In the result, all the three appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesanassessment Year: 2014-15

4 | P a g e ITA Nos.87-89/JAB/2019 (AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Pooran Lal Vishwakarma & other v. ACIT (ii) in respect of r a t e of deduction of †ax a† source, where such rate is no† in accordance wi†h †he provisions of †his Act (2) For the purposes of processing of statements under sub-section (\), the Board

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS , GHAZIABAB

In the result, all the three appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesanassessment Year: 2014-15

4 | P a g e ITA Nos.87-89/JAB/2019 (AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Pooran Lal Vishwakarma & other v. ACIT (ii) in respect of r a t e of deduction of †ax a† source, where such rate is no† in accordance wi†h †he provisions of †his Act (2) For the purposes of processing of statements under sub-section (\), the Board

POORAN LAL VISHWAKARMA,KATNI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesanassessment Year: 2014-15

4 | P a g e ITA Nos.87-89/JAB/2019 (AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Pooran Lal Vishwakarma & other v. ACIT (ii) in respect of r a t e of deduction of †ax a† source, where such rate is no† in accordance wi†h †he provisions of †his Act (2) For the purposes of processing of statements under sub-section (\), the Board

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE SAGAR, SAGAR vs. SHRI RISHAV KUMAR JAIN, SAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly 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 Revenue against the order of learned CIT(A)-1, Jabalpur dated 29/03/2019 pertaining to assessment year 2014-15. In this appeal the Revenue has raised the following grounds: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case