HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

TDS is deducted. It is seen that the assessee has not filed his return of income for AY 2015-16. The above transactions, total to amount Rs.1,32,51,842/- remain unexplained and there is escapement of income in absence of return of income filed. Thus income from above transaction has not been offered

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

TDS is deducted. It is seen that the assessee has not filed his return of income for AY 2015-16. The above transactions, total to amount Rs.1,32,51,842/- remain unexplained and there is escapement of income in absence of return of income filed. Thus income from above transaction has not been offered

VIJAY VINOD DURAGKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

section 148 of the Act, on the basis of information allegedly received by him from the Directorate of Income Tax (Investigation), New Delhi. AO has not applied his mind so as to come to an independent conclusion that he has reason to believe that income has escaped during the year. 1.4 Fishing enquiry-Information from intelligence wing: Giriraj Enterprises

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDLAL B MALOO, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 148 of the Act was issued on 12th May 2008. The Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment on the ground that investment in shares of IFSL amounting to ` 2,75,000, was made in cash and the purported source of such investment namely withdrawal from M/s Nandlal Enterprises, was not verifiable with reference to the books of account

VIKRAM AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4 (4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 issued and subsequent assessment made. The ground of appeal no. 1, 2 & 3 are accordingly dismissed. 6.3 Ground No. 4 pertains the addition of Rs 4,36,70,910/- as unexplained income u/s 69 of the IT Act. 6.3.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer in his assessment order dated 28/09/2021 has stated that:- Vikram Radheshyam

VIKRAM AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 issued and subsequent assessment made. The ground of appeal no. 1, 2 & 3 are accordingly dismissed. 6.3 Ground No. 4 pertains the addition of Rs 4,36,70,910/- as unexplained income u/s 69 of the IT Act. 6.3.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer in his assessment order dated 28/09/2021 has stated that:- Vikram Radheshyam

VIKRAM AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 issued and subsequent assessment made. The ground of appeal no. 1, 2 & 3 are accordingly dismissed. 6.3 Ground No. 4 pertains the addition of Rs 4,36,70,910/- as unexplained income u/s 69 of the IT Act. 6.3.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer in his assessment order dated 28/09/2021 has stated that:- Vikram Radheshyam

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 of the Act. The assessment proceedings were concluded by accepting the return income filed by the assessee. An assessment order under section 143(3) r/w section 147 was passed on 29/03/2022, accepting the returned income. Subsequently, a notice dated 29/12/2023, under section 263 of the Act was placed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax. Consequently, an order dated 29/03/2024

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 of the Act. The assessment proceedings were concluded by accepting the return income filed by the assessee. An assessment order under section 143(3) r/w section 147 was passed on 29/03/2022, accepting the returned income. Subsequently, a notice dated 29/12/2023, under section 263 of the Act was placed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax. Consequently, an order dated 29/03/2024

CHANDRAKUMAR MADHUSUDANJI JAJODIA,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

section 143(2) are mandatory. Without issue of notice u/s 143(2) no valid assessment is framed. Reliance on: i) (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC) ACIT & Anr. Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (P- 103 – 112) (105) ii) (2019) 108 taxmann.com 183 (SC) CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal (P- 113 – 118) (114) iii) ITAT order in ITA No.1744/Mum/2016 in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

section 133(6) and confirmed of providing services to the assessee company and receipt of payment from it. They also provided copy of agreement, their bank statements and audited financial statements. In the assessment order Id. AO held that though the two companies have shown this amount as income in their P&L a/c but they are majorly engaged

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

TDS is deducted. It is seen that the assessee has not filed his return of income for AY 2015-16. The above transactions, total to amount Rs.1,32,51,842/- remain unexplained and there is escapement of income in absence of return of income filed. Thus income from above transaction has not been offered

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS (EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 of the Act by the Assessing Officer declaring total income at ` 4,98,62,943. The Assessing Officer, after adopting due process, completed the assessment under section 147 of the Act on 29/03/2023, determining total assessed income at ` 6,28,80,335, by making addition of ` 1,25,89,787, under section 69C r/w section 115BBE

M/S INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 201 of the Act vide Finance Bill, 2009 and viewed that the Parliament did not make any amendment to the time limits for the non residents which indicates that the Parliament has accepted the judicial pronouncements for the limitation period already set out by the courts. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court also considered the decision

INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 201 of the Act vide Finance Bill, 2009 and viewed that the Parliament did not make any amendment to the time limits for the non residents which indicates that the Parliament has accepted the judicial pronouncements for the limitation period already set out by the courts. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court also considered the decision

SHRI PRAMOD NARAYANRAO GHALANI ,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/11/2013, declaring total income at ` 4,80,280. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) and 143(2) were issued and served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to file various details like copy of bank statement, copy of Balance Sheet as on 31/03/2009, and details of interest paid

JAGDISHPRASAD MAHESHWARI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.748/Nag/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jagdishprasad Maheshwari Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-4, C/O Surgical India, Nagpur Shop No. 214,215,224,225, Sandesh Dawa Bazar, Near Haj House, Ganjipeth, Nagpur-440018, Maharashtra Pan: Acypm9289M Appellant Respondent

TDS and further on verification of scrutiny assessment record, assessee has claimed expenses of purchase of gold jewellery worth Rs.51,400/- and also the assessee had given money to the associations for conducting of conference. All these three issues have been referred in the reasons recorded for reopening. There is no other reference of any independent material gathered

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS (EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGARAM

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

148 of the Act was issued in response to which the assessee filed return of income on 11/04/2023, declaring total income at ₹ 13,19,49,823. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices were issued which were duly replied by the assessee. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order dated 06/06/2023, under section 143(3) r/w section