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

section 10(33) of the Act, Pune Bench of Tribunal in cross appeals in the case of Shri Somnath Vaijanath Sakre in ITA Nos.2986/PUN/2016 and 2605/PUN/2016, for assessment year 2012-13 vide order dated 08.03.2019 held such set off, constitutes an allowable claim. The assessee brought our attention to the contents of para 10 of the said order in this

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

section 10(33) of the Act, Pune Bench of Tribunal in cross appeals in the case of Shri Somnath Vaijanath Sakre in ITA Nos.2986/PUN/2016 and 2605/PUN/2016, for assessment year 2012-13 vide order dated 08.03.2019 held such set off, constitutes an allowable claim. The assessee brought our attention to the contents of para 10 of the said order in this

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

section 10(33) of the Act, Pune Bench of Tribunal in cross appeals in the case of Shri Somnath Vaijanath Sakre in ITA Nos.2986/PUN/2016 and 2605/PUN/2016, for assessment year 2012-13 vide order dated 08.03.2019 held such set off, constitutes an allowable claim. The assessee brought our attention to the contents of para 10 of the said order in this

SIMA RAVISINGH KACHHAWAH,UMRER vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadalesima Ravisingh Kachhawah, Girad Road, Om Nagar Umrer, ……………. Appellant Nagpur- 441203 Maharastra, Pan – Aqmpk2899K V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(4), Nagpur Assessee By: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.Ar Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 15.03.2023, without due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in raising an arbitrary and excessive demand of Rs. 9,76,265/-, rendering the assessment order unjustified, unwarranted, and bad in law. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) NFAC

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

144 ITR 280 Delhi) answered the question as whether the expenditure incurred by the assessed in sponsoring a football tournament was an allowable deduction under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was held as under: "For the purpose of satisfying the test whether, the expenditure is in connection with the business it is not necessary that

SANJAY MOTIRAMJI MULEY,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD (4)(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesanjay Motiramji Muley, Ward No.7, Mahajan Pura ……………. Appellant Bhandara Road, Pardi Nagpur 440008. Pan – Akdpm6463G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(4), Nagpur Assessee By : Ms. Alfiya Rozie.Ar Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

capital gains of Rs.39,51,400/- and passed the assessment order dated 11/12/2012, under section 144 r/w section 147 of the Act. Aggrieved

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

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

capital gains; view of the Tribunal in allowing the assessee‘s appeal on the principle of consistency cannot in the present facts be faulted with.‖ 17 The Nirmal Ujwal Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. A.Y. 2012–13 10. The learned Counsel further submitted that the issue is also covered by the following case laws of the Hon’ble High Court

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

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Nagpur [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the department are as follows: [1] The learned CIT(A) erred in quashing the impugned order dated 30.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 B without

DAYAL AGRO PRODUCTS LTD,AKOLA vs. JCIT, AKOLA RANGE, AKOLA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nagpur, [“learned CIT”], for the assessment year 2010-11. Dayal Agro Products Ltd vs. JCIT, Akola ITA no.201/Nag./2017 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:– “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SMT. KANCHAN KISHORE JHAM,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is disposed off with the aforesaid clarification

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

144 r/w section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") and directed the Assessing Officer to verify the issue of short term capital gain

KUNDA GAYAKWAD,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadalekunda Mahadev Gayakwad, Plot.No.B-60, Murlidhar Society, Koradi Road, ……………. Appellant Nagpur 441111, Maharashtra. Pan – Cpmpg5995R V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–2(3), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Shri.Madhao Vichore.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. D.R.

section 144 r.w.s 147 and u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the A.Y. 2019–20. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:– “1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, Learned Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs. 31,44,000/- under the head Long Term Capital

SHIVPRASAD SHEVADE,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), BSNL RTTC BUILDING, NAGPUR

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Shivprasad Shevade, Ito, Ward-4(4), Plot No. 80, Attadeep Nagar, Vs Bsnl Rttc Building, Seminary Near Juni Vasti Manewada, Nagpur, Hills, Nagpur, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440027. Mharashtra–440033. [Pan: Eqops0368M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 without properly considering the evidence and submissions filed during the course of appellate proceedings. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in dismissing the appeal and upholding the addition of `. 21,30,74,000/- treating the entire amount of sale consideration as short-term capital gains, without appreciating the fact that

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

section 54F was not given without appreciating the fact that the construction was carried out by local contractor & as assessee was staying in small village with no knowledge about the storage of bills. vouchers etc. & there was no requirement for clearance of pollution etc. The lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and further erred

IDRISH KHAN,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Royidrish Khan, 1St Floor, Aman Ito, Ward – 2(2), Nagpur Majestic, Dinshaw Factory Vs Road, Katolroad S.O., Nagpur (Urban), Nagpur, Pan : Afhpp 5844 H Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 O R D E R

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of assessment order passed 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 15.03.2023 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 469 days in filing the instant appeal. Affidavit for condonation of delay has been

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground