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 is on the revenue account? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) is right in deleting disallowance of premium payable on zero percent fully redeemable non- convertible marketable debentures of Rs. 3,63,01,370/- without appreciating the fact that the same does not amount

FAIZ ZAKIR VALI,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT 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

capital gains on sale of land for the year 2010-11 by holding the land to be non–agricultural. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A). 5. The learned CIT(A), vide his impugned order, sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer both on legality as well as on merits. Aggrieved

NIRMALKUMAR AGRAWAL HUF,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHANDARA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

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

capital gain your all bank accounts. and unsecured loan advanced. Pg.5, Para–3.2 Notice u/s 142(1) dt. 29/10/2022 – Point 2. Pg.4, Para–3 • As stated by the assessee during • Please furnish agreement • There is no written assessment / contract depicting agreement / contract proceedings that terms and conditions of for loan taken from there was no loan taken from NAPL

PRAKASH SHESHRAO WANKHEDE,KORADI KAMPTEE, NAGPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprakash Sheshrao Wankhede, Khaprikoradi, Ward No.6 Near Hanuman Mandir Tehsil Kamptee, Koradi (Nv) ……………. Appellant Nagpur -441 111, Maharashtra. Pan–Abypw7048B V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(4), Nagpur Assessee By: None Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.Dr

111, Maharashtra. PAN–ABYPW7048B v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(4), Nagpur Assessee by: None Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR Date of Hearing – 09/10/2025 Date of Order – 10/10/2025 O R D E R The assessee has filed the appeal against the order dated 23/07/2024, passed by the CIT(A)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi, u/sec 147r.w.s144

RAMKRUSHNA ZILBAJI THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WRAD -4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain in view of investment in specified assets 8. That affidavit of both witnesses to said agreement to sale were submitted and are on record In such situation, it is submitted that observation of the CIT appeal that assessee failed to discharge his onus is not correct. 27. Further the CIT appeal confirmed the action of AD under Section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA RADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

111 acre project near VCA Cricket Stadium on Wardha Road, Jamtha Nagpur (M.H.). Thus, it is crystal clear that the valuation report is nothing but an estimate. The additions perpetuated by the AO under Section 69C is on account of unexplained expenditure. The legislative history of Section 69C is narrated below. “This section was inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER , NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

111 acre project near VCA Cricket Stadium on Wardha Road, Jamtha Nagpur (M.H.). Thus, it is crystal clear that the valuation report is nothing but an estimate. The additions perpetuated by the AO under Section 69C is on account of unexplained expenditure. The legislative history of Section 69C is narrated below. “This section was inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

111 acre project near VCA Cricket Stadium on Wardha Road, Jamtha Nagpur (M.H.). Thus, it is crystal clear that the valuation report is nothing but an estimate. The additions perpetuated by the AO under Section 69C is on account of unexplained expenditure. The legislative history of Section 69C is narrated below. “This section was inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

111 acre project near VCA Cricket Stadium on Wardha Road, Jamtha Nagpur (M.H.). Thus, it is crystal clear that the valuation report is nothing but an estimate. The additions perpetuated by the AO under Section 69C is on account of unexplained expenditure. The legislative history of Section 69C is narrated below. “This section was inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

111 acre project near VCA Cricket Stadium on Wardha Road, Jamtha Nagpur (M.H.). Thus, it is crystal clear that the valuation report is nothing but an estimate. The additions perpetuated by the AO under Section 69C is on account of unexplained expenditure. The legislative history of Section 69C is narrated below. “This section was inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

111 acre project near VCA Cricket Stadium on Wardha Road, Jamtha Nagpur (M.H.). Thus, it is crystal clear that the valuation report is nothing but an estimate. The additions perpetuated by the AO under Section 69C is on account of unexplained expenditure. The legislative history of Section 69C is narrated below. “This section was inserted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment

A,C.I.T. (EXEMPTION), NAGPUR vs. M/S VIDARBHA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

111,114,115,117 of 2010 and 133, 136, 138 & 139 of 2010. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the appeals filed by revenue had directed to the Department to dispose of application of appellant filed for registration u/s 12AA of LT. Act 1961 on 1/4/2003 within three months from the date of its order. The Hon'ble Commissioner

ASSTT.C,I,.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S 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 7 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

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

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 COAL(INDIA) 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