DINESH JAT,SAGAR vs. CIT (A), SAGAR

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

cash deposits, and was decided ex parte. In that case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) (vide order dated 24.02.2025) set aside the reassessment

DINESH JAT,SAGAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC

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

cash deposits, and was decided ex parte. In that case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) (vide order dated 24.02.2025) set aside the reassessment

SHRI NITIN SHARMA,JABALPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

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

Cash deposit, 1 | P a g e Nitin Sharma v. Pr. CIT it was not open for the ld. Pr. CIT to, in exercise of the revisionary power u/s. 263, hold that the Assessing Officer (AO) ought to have examined or inquired into other aspects of the assessee’s return of income or affairs having a bearing on his income

SUNIL KUMAR PATHAK,REWA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, , REWA

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesunil Kumar Pathak Vs. Ito, Ward – 1, 3Rd Floor, A Block, Shilpi Rewa-486001, Plaza, Pili Kothi, Madhya Pradesh. Rewa-486001, Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Arwpp9628A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Dhiraj Ghai.Fca.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 10.11.2023 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) / Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 144 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

cash deposits and RTGS aggregating to Rs. 77,22,000/-. The assessee’s son Shri Sunil Kumar Pathak has submitted that the his father was agriculturalist and was doing combined agricultural activity on behalf of the joint family and the family owned about 385.406 Hectors of agricultural land. Further the assessee was elder son of the family and therefore managed

CHHAYA MASURKAR,BALAGHAT vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER JURISDICTION OFFICER- ITO, BALAGHAT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshrachhaya Masurkar V. National Faceless 1 Ward No.9 Ram Mandir Road, Assessment Centre Katangi, Madhya Pradesh- Jurisdiction Officer-Ito, 481445. Balaghat Delhi. Tan/Pan:Cakpm8662A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) O R D E R (1). The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 13.02.2024 Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred As To “Cit(A)”)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: -

reassessment proceeding was bad in law. The assessment order and CIT (A) order is bad in law for other reasons too. 3. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the assessee was not required to file the return of income as her income was below taxable limit. 4. On facts and in circumstances of the case

SMT. ASHA YADAV,SAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2012-13 Smt. Asha Yadav V. Principal C.I.T.-1 Katra Ward, Bina Jabalpur Sagar Tan/Pan:Abzpu9749E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sanjay Mishra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03 04 2019 O R D E R Per A. D. Jain, V.P.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Dated 26/3/2018 Passed By The Ld. Pr. C.I.T., Jabalpur U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, Taking The Following Grounds: 1. That, The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit-1, Jabalpur U/S 263 Dated 26.03.2018 Is Arbitrary, Erroneous & Contrary To The Facts & Records Of The Assessment, Hence Liable To Be Set Aside. 2. That, On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Conclusion Of Pr. Cit-1, Jabalpur Regarding Contravention Of Provision U/S 40 A (3) Of The Act Is Erroneous. 3. That, On The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, The Conclusion Of Pr. Cit-1, Jabalpur Regarding Applicability Of Section 194 C Of The Act Is Illegal, Arbitrary & Erroneous. 4. That, The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Served To The Assessee On 09.04.2018, Hence The Order Is Clearly Barred By Limitation. 5. That, While Passing The Order U/S 263 No Reasonable & Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard Is Provided To The Assessee.

cash deposits and to ascertain the tax liability, the case needs to be scrutinized. 10. It is seen that as per the assessment order dated 11/3/2016 (supra), no addition based on the reasons recorded has been made. The only addition made is that of Rs.80,000/-, representing disallowance made out of development charges, which is not the subject matter

SHRI SANDEEP KUMAR BARMAN,KATNI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-KATNI, KATNI

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2008-09 Sandeep Kumar Barman V. Income Tax Officer Shivaji Nagar, Gali No.18 Ward Katni Katni Tan/Pan:Aptpb7891N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri L. L. Sharma, Advocate Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03 04 2019 O R D E R Per A. D. Jain, V.P.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Jabalpur, Dated 19/2/2016 For Assessment Year 2010-11, Taking The Following Grounds: 1. Considering The Fact That The Id Cit(A) Has Passed The Appeal Order Without Considering The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee & Further Id Cit(A) Has Not Decided Grounds Of Appeal On Merit Hence In View Of Hon'Ble Itat Jabalpur Bench Jabalpur Decision In The Case Of M/S Shriji Ware House V Ito (Ita No 38/Jab/2015) The Order Of Id Cit(A) Is Bad In Law & May Kindly Be Cancelled. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Id Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Passing Ex-Party Appeal Order. Without Prejudice To Above 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Id Cit(A) Should Have Held That The Id Ito Ward 2, Katni

reassessment proceeding in the case of the assessee. 4. Under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Id CIT(A), in view of Hon'ble ITAT Jabalpur Bench decision in the case of Raga Finvest Ltd. (ITA no 256 to 259/Jab/2013) should have held that the Id AO was not justified in treating cash of Rs.9

SHRI ANAND PANDEY,REWA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

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

reassessment proceedings had been initiated. The assessee‟s (an Advocate by profession) version of being only a name lender, who had therefore not made any investment toward the said purchase, was accepted by the AO – who limited his inquiry to the investment by the assessee as the joint owner, on the strength of the following documents: (a) sale deed dated