ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

capital gain as shown in return of income and addition made in the assessment framed on account of business income

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gains. 14. I.T.A. No. 79/Nag/2010 (ITAT, Nagpur) Plastic Surge Industries Pvt Ltd –Vs- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 15. I.T.A. No. 6429/Mum/2009 (ITAT, Mumbai) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax –Vs- Naishadh V. Vachharajani 16. I.T.A. No. 961/Mum/2010 (ITAT, Mumbai) Nagindas P. Sheth (HUF) –Vs- ACIT 17. (2006) 6 SOT 0247 (ITAT, Mumbai) Mukesh R. Marolia –Vs- Additional

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

capital gains.\n14. I.T.A. No. 79/Nag/2010 (ITAT, Nagpur) Plastic Surge Industries Pvt Ltd -Vs- Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax\n15. I.T.A. No. 6429/Mum/2009 (ITAT, Mumbai) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax –Vs- Naishadh V. Vachharajani\n16. I.T.A. No. 961/Mum/2010 (ITAT, Mumbai) Nagindas P. Sheth (HUF) –Vs- ACIT\n17. (2006) 6 SOT 0247 (ITAT, Mumbai) Mukesh R. Marolia -Vs- Additional

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

capital gain and added the same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act. While allowing the appeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the addition

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

capital gain and added the same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act. While allowing the appeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the addition

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

capital gain and added the same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act. While allowing the appeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the addition

SANJAY GULABCHAND GUPTA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

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

Capital gain but remaining in the time frame stipulated in Section 54F, deduction u/s 54F cannot be denied. The appellant also stated that it is on record and admitted fact that construction started in Asst Year 2015-16 and culminated in Asst Year 2017-18. In course of this period the Assessee claimed exemption u/s 54F for gain

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VINODKUMAR RAJENDRALAL KOCHHAR, KAMPTEE

In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed

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

Gains and Income from other sources & he had been regularly filing his return of income for the last 5 decades. (iii) During the captioned assessment year, the appellant had opted for computation of income U/s. 44AD in respect of his business activity and while filing online return of Income u/s. 139(1) for AY 2016-17, PART A-BS- Balance

RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

additional income of `. 18.24 crore on account of bogus long term capital gain, however, in the return of income filed

SHRI VISHWAKARAMA JEWELLERS ,AKOLA vs. DCIT AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

additional income as business income in his return of income and paid due taxes thereon. 18. In our view, what is relevant before invoking the deeming provisions is not just the factum of survey action but besides that, what is the explanation so offered by the Assessee explaining the nature and source of income so found during the course

NARESH VASANTRAJ TRIVEDI,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

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

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

addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains from sale of jewellery as short-term capital gains. The capital gains on the sale of jewellery ought to be assessed based on the period of holding and in accordance with the provisions of the Income

NARESH VASANTRAI TRIVEDI,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

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

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

addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains from sale of jewellery as short-term capital gains. The capital gains on the sale of jewellery ought to be assessed based on the period of holding and in accordance with the provisions of the Income

NARESH VASANTRAI TRIVEDI,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

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

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

addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains from sale of jewellery as short-term capital gains. The capital gains on the sale of jewellery ought to be assessed based on the period of holding and in accordance with the provisions of the Income

NARESH VASANTRAI TRIVEDI,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

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

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

addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains from sale of jewellery as short-term capital gains. The capital gains on the sale of jewellery ought to be assessed based on the period of holding and in accordance with the provisions of the Income

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

addition of an amount of Rs. 3.87 crore by treating the same under the capital subsidy. Moreover, it is submitted that the issue of subsidy received is capital in nature is not under dispute as both the lower authorities have accepted the same. The only dispute raised by lower authorities is whether the capital subsidy can be reduced from book

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

addition of an amount of Rs. 3.87 crore by treating the same under the capital subsidy. Moreover, it is submitted that the issue of subsidy received is capital in nature is not under dispute as both the lower authorities have accepted the same. The only dispute raised by lower authorities is whether the capital subsidy can be reduced from book

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.2, NAGPUR vs. SHRI GOVINDDAS GOVERDHAN DAGA, NAGPUR

In the result, cross-objection filed by the assessee stands dismissed

addition of Rs.11,47,101/- being the difference between the gross interest received and the business income shown u/s 44AD of the I.T. Act, 1961.\n5. (a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in allowing the short term capital loss of Rs. 61,56,885/- without any evidence

JEETENDRA CHANDRAKANT NAYAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX(OSD), NAGPUR

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

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

addition confirmed is illegal, invalid and bad in law. 6] The assessee denies the liability of interest charged U/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act. Without prejudice, levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. Shri Jeetendra Chandrakant Nayak vs. ACIT (OSD) ITA no. 368/Nag./2023