ITO WARD-1(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. ASHWAMI SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

24. We wish to refer profitably to Para No. 49.3 of CBDT Circular No. 05 12010 F.No.142/13/2010-S0 (TPL), dated 3rd June, 2010 (Explanatory Notes on Finance Act (No.2) 2009), where under the PAN based immunity and exemption from making TDS to Transporters was extended in all Transport contracts. "49.3 Provisions for payments and tax deducted at source to transporters

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

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

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S RAJYAS SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

SHEPHALI ANIL MALVIYA,NAGPUR vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals (Ms

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

vi) ` 7,86,217 Adhoc disallowances out of (vii) following expenses Remuneration Rs. 27,15,985 Administrative expenses Rs. 20,02,195 Rs.47,18,180 Disallowance at 20% ` 9,43,636 ` 6,46,05,741 Loan from Shree Agarwal Coal India P.Ltd. treated (After Rectifi- (viii) as dividend u/s 2(22)(e) cation: ` 6,49,70,741 Loan from Mansa

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

ASSTT. CIT, CIR- 7, NAGPUR vs. M/S. NEWQUEST CORPORATION LTD., CHANDRAPUR

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The Acit Vs. M/S.Newquest Corporation Ltd. Circle-7, (Now Known As M/S. Avantha Nagpur Holding Ltd. Ballalrpur Paper Mills P.O. Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur Pan No.:Aabcb 6134 E Appellant Respondent

vi) Strengthen Avantha Brand and goodwill (vii) Provide strategic oversight to top level talent Organization structure is a platform of larger strategy and the means in achieving the goal to evolve the desired structures. It is imperative that the assessee company will continue to provide a framework to implement various policies and decisions of the Avantha Management Board. In rendering

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. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee purchased shares of an unlisted Pvt Ltd Co in 2010. This unlisted-Co then merged with another unlisted-Co, M/s.Focus Industrial Resources Ltd and shares of this merged entity were allotted to the assessee. Subsequently, the merged entity allotted further bonus shares to the assessee and thereafter

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. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee purchased shares of an unlisted Pvt Ltd Co in 2010. This unlisted-Co then merged with another unlisted-Co, M/s.Focus Industrial Resources Ltd and shares of this merged entity were allotted to the assessee. Subsequently, the merged entity allotted further bonus shares to the assessee and thereafter