SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

deduction / exemption from capital gain; and (ii) investment in immovable property. The Assessing Officer after making enquiries and examination concluded

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

deduction u/s 54F is available in respect of Capital Gain arising from sale of more than one Long Term Capital

SHRI DEEPAK SURESH GADGE,,NAGPUR vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1 , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

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

Gains‘ whereby the full consideration received as a result of transfer of the capital asset should be taken into consideration out of which the appellant is entitled to deduction

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

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 Commissioner Of Income

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

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 Commissioner Of Income

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

deduction under section 54F of the Act against the capital gain on transfer of long term capital asset, on the ground

VASANT CO-OP SHETKARI GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 29/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Vasant Co-Op. Shetkari Ginning & Pressing Factory Limited; At. Yavatmal Road, Wani, Tq. Wani, Dist. Yavatmal-440 010 Pan : Aaaat1439M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pravin Gandhi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr

deduction therein contemplated would get triggered only where the capital gain arises from transfer of a capital asset, being machinery

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

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

Gains\n*15,354\n16,36,74,245\n16,36,89,599\n3.\nThe assessee has claimed deduction u/s 54F, being investment made in\n\"Capital

SHRI. ABDULLABHAI HASANALI,,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,-II, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

gains. The CIT, relying on certain decisions, opined that by allowing such set off of brought forward losses, there is loss of revenue and therefore, the CIT held the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The CIT drew parallel to the way the exempt agricultural income is treated in matters of such

ABDULLABHAI HASANALI THROUGH L/H ZOHRABAI,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-3,, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

gains. The CIT, relying on certain decisions, opined that by allowing such set off of brought forward losses, there is loss of revenue and therefore, the CIT held the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The CIT drew parallel to the way the exempt agricultural income is treated in matters of such

ABDULLABHAI HASANALI THROUGH L/H ZOHRABAI,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-3,, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

gains. The CIT, relying on certain decisions, opined that by allowing such set off of brought forward losses, there is loss of revenue and therefore, the CIT held the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The CIT drew parallel to the way the exempt agricultural income is treated in matters of such

AVANTHA HOLDINGS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-5,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

deducted at source has been made by appellant. On above undisputed factual position relief granted by CIT(A) in the case of appellant cannot be faulted. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances and evidence on record we find no merit in appeal of revenue. Thus Ground No. 4 and 5 of the Revenue are dismissed.”\n8. The facts

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.5, NAGPUR vs. M/S AVANTHA HOLDINGS LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

deducted at source has been made by appellant. On above undisputed factual position relief granted by CIT(A) in the case of appellant cannot be faulted. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances and evidence on record we find no merit in appeal of revenue. Thus Ground No. 4 and 5 of the Revenue are dismissed.”\n8. The facts

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

capital gain,\nwithout appreciating the fact that the addition of Rs.2,67,14,897/- made by\nthe AO was supported with finding that sale deed/assignment deed was duly\nregistered on 29.03.2016 and the purchaser deducted

ITO- (INTERNATION TAXATION),, NAGPUR vs. SMT. URMILA SHARAN RAMPAL,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

capital gain on sale of shares. 2. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Nagpur erred in allowing deduction

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

deduction in immediately preceding year i.e. A.Y. 2009-10. On same analogy, gain on foreign exchange fluctuation cannot be brought to tax in the assessment year under consideration being capital

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR. 8, NAGPUR vs. M/S V.D. KANAL, NAGPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

capital gains as part of income surrendered during survey. The grounds of appeal in Assessee’s appeal read as under : 1. The Appellant is a registered partnership firm carrying on business as Civil Contractor and Engineers. The Appellant for the above assessment year shown Income as per return of Rs. 1,21,08,655/- &Remuneration paid to partners

M/S V.D.KANAL,NAGPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8, NAGPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

capital gains as part of income surrendered during survey. The grounds of appeal in Assessee’s appeal read as under : 1. The Appellant is a registered partnership firm carrying on business as Civil Contractor and Engineers. The Appellant for the above assessment year shown Income as per return of Rs. 1,21,08,655/- &Remuneration paid to partners