NARMADA INN,BESIDE SHUBH MOTORS, KATRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDLA WARD, MANDLA

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Narmada Inn, V. Income Tax Officer, Beside Shubh Motors, Katra, Mandla Ward, Mp-481661. Mandla, Mp-481661. Pan:Aagfn9764J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri H. S. Modh, Adv Respondent By: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 07 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 01 2025 O R D E R

house property income as against the business income and allowed deduction u/s 24(2) at Rs.2,66,052/- as against

SHRI PANKAJ GOEL,ITARSI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE ITARSI, ITARSI

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

income from house property‟,” and the last words of the sentence „business income‟ be placed under parenthesis. 2. Para 2.4 (pages

SHRI SUBHASH KUMAR AAHI,SATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Nikhil Choudhary

Income-Tax’, 88 ITR 293 (P&H) that it was an established principle of law that a party was entitled to show and prove that the admission made by him previously was 15 AY 2013-14 Shri Subhash Kumar Aahi in fact not correct and true. The learned CIT(A) had failed to appreciate this and neither was the statement

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

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

business income, i.e., as against capital gains. We fail to see as to how the doctrine of merger would operate in the instant case to oust the jurisdiction of the revisionary authority. In fact, as stated by the ld. Pr. CIT, the Revenue has not accepted the stand of the AO, resulting in it being in appeal before the Tribunal

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

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

business income, i.e., as against capital gains. We fail to see as to how the doctrine of merger would operate in the instant case to oust the jurisdiction of the revisionary authority. In fact, as stated by the ld. Pr. CIT, the Revenue has not accepted the stand of the AO, resulting in it being in appeal before the Tribunal

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

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

business income, i.e., as against capital gains. We fail to see as to how the doctrine of merger would operate in the instant case to oust the jurisdiction of the revisionary authority. In fact, as stated by the ld. Pr. CIT, the Revenue has not accepted the stand of the AO, resulting in it being in appeal before the Tribunal

SMT. ANURADHA UPADHYAY,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

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

business income, i.e., as against capital gains. We fail to see as to how the doctrine of merger would operate in the instant case to oust the jurisdiction of the revisionary authority. In fact, as stated by the ld. Pr. CIT, the Revenue has not accepted the stand of the AO, resulting in it being in appeal before the Tribunal

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.

house. In normal course, the exigency in making cash payments for such expenses cannot be ruled out Where the explanation of the assessee that violation of provisions of s. 269SS was due to certain bona fide belief of the assessee is found to be acceptable, penalty under s 27D is untenable. [CIT vs. Saini Medical Store

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JABALPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH KUMAR AGRAWAL, JABALPUR

In the result, both appeal of the Revenue and cross both appeal of the Revenue and cross both appeal of the Revenue and cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Central Circle, Jabalpur, Shri Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, 291, Ramanth Building, Napier 01/32/33, Ashirwad Market, Town, Jabalpur-482001 Vs. Lordganj, Jabalpur-482001. Pan No. Achpa 7963 K Appellant Respondent

Income Disclosure S Scheme’ (IDS) on 26.09.2016 in the form of silver of Rs.53,04,616/-, gold of 26.09.2016 in the form of silver of Rs.53,04,616/ 26.09.2016 in the form of silver of Rs.53,04,616/ Shri Mukesh Kumar Agarwal 5 ITA No. 7/JAB/2021 and CO No. 7/JAB/2021 Rs.6,82,988/-, diamond of Rs.8,40,000/ , diamond