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

natural justice to the assessee. f. Further, scrips traded by the assessee in the given financial year are not mentioned in DDIT (Inv) Kolkata report. 8. In the judgement of the Swati Bajaj, the hon'ble Court has relied upon investigation report and has accepted the cases where bogus LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS

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

natural justice to the assessee. f. Further, scrips traded by the assessee in the given financial year are not mentioned in DDIT (Inv) Kolkata report. 8. In the judgement of the Swati Bajaj, the hon'ble Court has relied upon investigation report and has accepted the cases where bogus LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS

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 gain and to avoid paying taxes and have also been forwarded the details of transactions entered into by the assessee. The learned assessing officer has not any provided the details forwarded by Investigation Wing, Kolkatta as well as statement of persons, whose statement were recorded during the course of investigation made by the Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation

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

capital gain and to avoid paying taxes and have also been forwarded the details of transactions entered into by the assessee. The learned assessing officer has not any provided the details forwarded by Investigation Wing, Kolkatta as well as statement of persons, whose statement were recorded during the course of investigation made by the Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation

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

natural justice and consequent additions made are unjustified and unsustainable. Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition made as the procedure is in complete violation with settled propositions of law. 7) The assessee denies liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961. Without prejudice, levy of interest under section 234A, 2334B

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

nature of unexplained deposits in bank account ignoring the submission of the Appellant. The source of the amount of Rs. 5,00,000 being from explainable sources, the addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains

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

nature of unexplained deposits in bank account ignoring the submission of the Appellant. The source of the amount of Rs. 5,00,000 being from explainable sources, the addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains

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

nature of unexplained deposits in bank account ignoring the submission of the Appellant. The source of the amount of Rs. 5,00,000 being from explainable sources, the addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains

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

nature of unexplained deposits in bank account ignoring the submission of the Appellant. The source of the amount of Rs. 5,00,000 being from explainable sources, the addition deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in assessing the capital gains

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

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

capital gain which is impressible. I therefore\nhold that reasons recorded for making verification of income no valid reasons\nin the eye of law for Issuing notice u/s 148 of 1.T. Act 1961.\n8.12 Coming to the second submission of the appellant, there is merit in the\ncontention that the objections raised by the appellant to the reasons recorded

DAYAL COTSPIN LIMITED,AKOLA vs. ACIT, AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

natural justice and is not in accordance with law. 10. The assessee denies liability to pay interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961. Without prejudice, levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. Any other ground that shall be prayed at the time of hearing

M/S INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

capital gains tax, the assessee cannot be taxed once again for non-deduction of TDS U/s. 195 of the Act. It is also observed that the seller Smt. Davuluri Sai Swapna is a non-resident from the assessment order passed by AO, Ward- 12(2), Hyderabad. Similarly it is also noticed that the AO erred in not adopting

INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

capital gains tax, the assessee cannot be taxed once again for non-deduction of TDS U/s. 195 of the Act. It is also observed that the seller Smt. Davuluri Sai Swapna is a non-resident from the assessment order passed by AO, Ward- 12(2), Hyderabad. Similarly it is also noticed that the AO erred in not adopting

SHREE MAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

natural justice and deserve to be quashed as per law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the learned AO has grossly erred and CIT (A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 57,68,020 as Income U/s 43CA of the Income Tax Act-1961 which is illegal and which deserves

SHREE MAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

natural justice and deserve to be quashed as per law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the learned AO has grossly erred and CIT (A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 57,68,020 as Income U/s 43CA of the Income Tax Act-1961 which is illegal and which deserves

ANIL SHANKAR PALEWAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.36/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Anil Shankar Palewar, The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.219, Suyog Nagar, V Ward-5(1), Nagpur. Nagpur – 440015. S Pan: Abzpp 8221 A Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani – Ar Revenue By Smt. Rashmi Mathur – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 26/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax[Nfac], Delhi Dated 26.12.2021Under Section 250 Of The Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao Grossly Erred In Disallowing & The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Delhi Grossly Erred In Confirming The Denial Of Benefit Of Exemption Under Section 54Ec Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Claimed By The Appellant In His Return Of Income. The Exemption Under Section 54Ec Anil Shankar Palewar [A]

natural justice. 2) The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and / or withdraw the above ground of appeal with the kind permission of the Hon’ble Tribunal.” Submission of ld.AR : 2 The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee submitted as under : “1) That the Appellant entered into an agreement of Development dated 26.06.2014 vide which the Appellant transferred

FATTESING PUNAJI DHABRE,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX – 2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Fattesing Punaji Dhabre Pcit – 2, Nagpur Plot No. 132, Chandan Nagar, Post Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Hanuman Nagar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440001. Maharashtra – 440009. [Pan: Bacpd6505Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Madhav Vichare, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

capital gain remained unverified. The ld. PCIT was of the view that order passed by ld. Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The details on record clearly indicates that issues and discrepancies were neither verified nor enquired by ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer has not properly made necessary enquiries and verification

DY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX , CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S N KUMAR CONSTRUCTION CO .PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

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

justice to the assessee; 16. Suspicion cannot be a good evidence for the purpose of assessment unless it is corroborated by clinching evidence brought on record after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee; 17. These facts which emerge from the assessment order in no way have been disputed by the assessing officer. No direct evidence has been brought on record