ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

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

2)(a)(i) provides 100% deduction on the profit and gains of business attributable to the business of providing banking and credit facilities to the members of society. Therefore, even if certain expenses are disallowed, it will result in increase in gross taxable income and deduction under section 80P, would be allowable on 100% of such gross taxable income

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS under section 194C of the Act and was, therefore, directed to pay the tax amounting to ` 61,78,095, ` 57,84,468, ` 69,27,997, ` 2,43,03,965 and ` 34,30,645 under section 201(1) of the Act for the assessment year 2011–12, 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

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

TDS, details of Bank Accounts and details of various other expenses, etc. The appellant through his AR explained the case from time to time. From the documents submitted and 4 The Nirmal Ujwal Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. A.Y. 2012–13 explanations provided by the appellant, the AO notices that the appellant had earned interest income from Fixed Deposits with

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

2,68,490 5. The issue involved in ground no.3, 4, 5 and 6, in the assessment year 2014–15, relates to the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit 3 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 under section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

2,68,490 5. The issue involved in ground no.3, 4, 5 and 6, in the assessment year 2014–15, relates to the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit 3 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 under section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

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

2,68,490 5. The issue involved in ground no.3, 4, 5 and 6, in the assessment year 2014–15, relates to the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit 3 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 under section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

2,68,490 5. The issue involved in ground no.3, 4, 5 and 6, in the assessment year 2014–15, relates to the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit 3 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 under section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

2,68,490 5. The issue involved in ground no.3, 4, 5 and 6, in the assessment year 2014–15, relates to the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit 3 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 under section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

2,68,490 5. The issue involved in ground no.3, 4, 5 and 6, in the assessment year 2014–15, relates to the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit 3 Maheshwari Coal Beneficatgion & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2014–15 to 2020–21 under section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. AAKAR HOTELS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

TDS of Rs. 3,30,000/- on account of purchase of property from M/s Aakar Hotels. Further the said deed was also duly registered on 29.03.2016 and stamp duty of Rs. 18,15,000/-along with registration fees of Rs 30,000/- was paid to the government on account of transfer of property. V. The property was taken on lease

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

15) of section 155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of sub-clause (b) as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections. I have gone through the valuation report submitted by the Valuation Officer, Income Tax Department, Nagpur wherein the declared value

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

15,81,842/- from banks on which 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

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

15,81,842/- from banks on which 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

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

15,81,842/- from banks on which 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

BANK OF INDIA ,PRASHEONI BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

15 Bank of India bank in respect of its Umred Branch having TAN No. NGPB03048D filed its TDS statement (Form 26Q) for Q4 of FY 2012–13 on 15.07.2013 as against the due date of 15.05.2013 leading to a delay of 61 days. The ACIT TDS –CPC processed the TDS statement and issued an intimation u/s 143(1) under dated

BANK OF INDIA,SIHORA BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

15 Bank of India bank in respect of its Umred Branch having TAN No. NGPB03048D filed its TDS statement (Form 26Q) for Q4 of FY 2012–13 on 15.07.2013 as against the due date of 15.05.2013 leading to a delay of 61 days. The ACIT TDS –CPC processed the TDS statement and issued an intimation u/s 143(1) under dated

DR AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WORK,NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

TDS statement which was processed on 10/04/2022, wherein demand was raised for late fees under section 234E for ₹ 16,400, and interest thereon under section 220(2) of 19,593. 4. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order so passed by the Assessing Officer. 5. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the arguments made by the rival parties

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

15,64,07,053. Therefore, said expenditure has not been included in WIP of project and as such WIP to extent of Rs. 2,81,33,000/- is not required to be reduced. Issue: Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS 3.4 The assessee submits that, it had deducted TDS at the rate

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

15,64,07,053. Therefore, said expenditure has not been included in WIP of project and as such WIP to extent of Rs. 2,81,33,000/- is not required to be reduced. Issue: Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS 3.4 The assessee submits that, it had deducted TDS at the rate