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

capital gain is invested in purchasing a residential house or constructing the residential house within the time stipulated therein. Proviso to sub section (1) states that the exemption contemplated under sub section (1) would not be available where an assessee owns a residential house as on the date of the transfer and that the income from the residential house

M/S SHREE TRADERS ,BULDHANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

depreciable assets. The Tribunal held that the profits earned on transfer of fixed assets are not in the nature of business income and observed the set off of carry forward business loss can be set off of profits and gains of any business but not to profits arising on transfer of capital

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

depreciable asset, had wrongly allowed 4 The Vasant Co-Op. Shetkari Ginning & Pressing Factory Limited Vs. Pr. CIT indexation of its ‘cost of acquisition’ while computing the Long Term Capital Gain

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

depreciation @ 40% on the cost of aircraft. Addition made by A.O. at Rs.33.82 crores is held to be unjustified and is directed to be deleted.\n15. Since the present issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s SRC Aviation Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 37 taxmann.com 308 (Del.) and the Co-ordinate Bench decision

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

depreciation @ 40% on the cost of aircraft. Addition made by A.O. at Rs.33.82 crores is held to be unjustified and is directed to be deleted.\"\n15. Since the present issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s SRC Aviation Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 37 taxmann.com 308 (Del.) and the Co-ordinate Bench decision

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

gain/ loss on foreign exchange fluctuation holding it a capital receipt without appreciating the fact that assessee company itself credited the amount as revenue receipt treating the same as revenue receipt. Whether the assessee has shown fluctuation as a capital receipt in earlier year is not relevant. The Id. CIT(A) has relied on the decision in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR vs. AVANTHA HOLDINGS LIMITED, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

depreciation @ 40% on the cost of aircraft. Addition\nmade by A.O. at Rs.33.82 crores is held to be unjustified and is directed to be\ndeleted.\n15. Since the present issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi\nHigh Court in CIT v/s SRC Aviation Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 37 taxmann.com 308\n(Del.) and the Co-ordinate Bench

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

gains of business. So far as public charitable and religious trusts are concerned, their business profits are not exempt from tax, except in the cases falling under clause (a) or clause (b) of section 11(4A) of the IT Act. As the maximum marginal rate of tax under the new proviso to section 164(2) applies to the whole

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

gains of business. So far as public charitable and religious trusts are concerned, their business profits are not exempt from tax, except in the cases falling under clause (a) or clause (b) of section 11(4A) of the IT Act. As the maximum marginal rate of tax under the new proviso to section 164(2) applies to the whole

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

gains of business. So far as public charitable and religious trusts are concerned, their business profits are not exempt from tax, except in the cases falling under clause (a) or clause (b) of section 11(4A) of the IT Act. As the maximum marginal rate of tax under the new proviso to section 164(2) applies to the whole

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

depreciation, etc." (underlined and bold for emphasis) In the above decision, the Apex Court held that the subsidy received by the assessee is capital in nature and need not be deducted from the actual cost of asset, post consideration of the object with which the subsidy was granted to the assesse. In the present case, the subsidy is received

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

depreciation, etc." (underlined and bold for emphasis) In the above decision, the Apex Court held that the subsidy received by the assessee is capital in nature and need not be deducted from the actual cost of asset, post consideration of the object with which the subsidy was granted to the assesse. In the present case, the subsidy is received

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

capital expenditure he should have allowed the depreciation to the appellant. The AO did not allow the expenses as well as the depreciation, it clearly indicates the addition is made with the prejudice and unlawful way and therefore needs to be deleted. 18. Further not withstanding anything mentioned in above para, even otherwise, if the expenses on purchase of machines

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

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

depreciation of Rs. 47,53,025/-. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of unsecured loans being unexplained credits Rs. 6,45,38,278/-. 5 M/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd.& Group Cases 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

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

depreciation of Rs. 47,53,025/-. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of unsecured loans being unexplained credits Rs. 6,45,38,278/-. 5 M/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd.& Group Cases 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned

M/S SANJAY SHANKARRAO JADHAO,AMRAVATI vs. JIOINT C.I.T. AMRAVATI RANGE,, AMRAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

depreciation is further allowable on the touch stone of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd. (supra). Consequently, following the precedent, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. This ground is allowed. 8. Apropos the issue of exemption under section

M/S UNIVERSAL DRINKS PVT . LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CIR. -2, NAGPUR

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

capital gain. The learned A.R. vehemently submitted that the computation by the Assessing Officer is incorrect and the book profit should be considered at ` 57,27,891, i.e., he pleaded that the loss on sale of shares should be deducted while computing the book profit. 5. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order passed by the learned

R.B.SETH SHREERAM NARSINGHDAS,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR. 2(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.196/Nag/2015 ननिाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 R.B. Seth Shreeram Narsingdas, C/O. Ajay Saraf, C-2, Yogeshwar Ganga Apartments, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur-10. Pan : Aacfr0227N .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

depreciation of Rs.9,50,000/- on the said expenditure of Rs.95,00,000/- treated by him as capital expenditure. 5. The appellant craves leave to add or amend any ground of appeal with the permission of the Hon’ble Members.” 3. The brief facts pertaining to Ground No.3 are that during the course of search action cash of Rs.3

ASTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIR 2(3) R, NAGPUR vs. M GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHERIES LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

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

capital assets and thereby loosing gradually investment caused by wear and tear, and would need to replace the same by having lost value fully over a period of time ... ". Following said Supreme Court decision it was held by the Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. Parthas Trust (2001) 249 ITR 120 Kerala that assessee was entitled to depreciation

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA GLOBAL RESOURCES LTD(EAELIER KNOWN AS GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHHERIES LTD), NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

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

capital assets and thereby loosing gradually investment caused by wear and tear, and would need to replace the same by having lost value fully over a period of time ... ". Following said Supreme Court decision it was held by the Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. Parthas Trust (2001) 249 ITR 120 Kerala that assessee was entitled to depreciation