VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

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

E)A.O. after examining the capital gain declared in the return and on being satisfied accepted the capital gain as shown in the return. Computation of capital gain to be assessed to tax is ministerial act and same has been accepted by A.O. after due application of mind. On facts it cannot be said that there is lack of enquiry

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

22 Naresh Laxminarayan Grover ITA no.524, 525 & 526/Nag./2024 e. Thus, merely making assumption that since assessee has traded in the penny stock, whatever earned or loss incurred are bogus is bad in law and violation of natural justice to the assessee. f. Further, scrips traded by the assessee in the given financial year are not mentioned in DDIT

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

22 Naresh Laxminarayan Grover ITA no.524, 525 & 526/Nag./2024 e. Thus, merely making assumption that since assessee has traded in the penny stock, whatever earned or loss incurred are bogus is bad in law and violation of natural justice to the assessee. f. Further, scrips traded by the assessee in the given financial year are not mentioned in DDIT

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

22 Naresh Laxminarayan Grover ITA no.524, 525 & 526/Nag./2024 e. Thus, merely making assumption that since assessee has traded in the penny stock, whatever earned or loss incurred are bogus is bad in law and violation of natural justice to the assessee. f. Further, scrips traded by the assessee in the given financial year are not mentioned in DDIT

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

e cannot make claim of double deduction towards investment of sale proceeds arising out in two different assets in two different assessment years under two different provisions against the construction of same residential property. Since the construction as contemplated in Section 54F of the Act could happen only once and that has already happened in the preceding assessment years

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

E),dated March 31, 2015 after vide public consultations. The ICDS-VII relating to Government grants provides that all Government grants except relating to depreciable asset shall be recognized as income in accordance with the provisions of the said ICDS. The existing provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of section 43 of the Income-tax Act already contained

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

E),dated March 31, 2015 after vide public consultations. The ICDS-VII relating to Government grants provides that all Government grants except relating to depreciable asset shall be recognized as income in accordance with the provisions of the said ICDS. The existing provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of section 43 of the Income-tax Act already contained

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. These appeals are filed by the assessee challenging the impugned orders of even date 09/10/2018, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014–15 and 2015–16 respectively. Vidarbha Konkan Gramin Bank A.Y. 2014–15 & 2015–16 ITA no.7/Nag./2019 Assessee’s Appeal

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. These appeals are filed by the assessee challenging the impugned orders of even date 09/10/2018, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014–15 and 2015–16 respectively. Vidarbha Konkan Gramin Bank A.Y. 2014–15 & 2015–16 ITA no.7/Nag./2019 Assessee’s Appeal

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

E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 10/08/2017, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Nagpur, [―learned CIT(A)‖], for the assessment year 2013–14. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– ―1. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned

TAJSHREE AUTOWHEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

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

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

e-filing Portal of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was new, hence there was some technical problem while online submission of Appeal. 3) In such circumstances, a delay of 446 days has occurred in filling of the appeal. The appellant submits that the delay is unintentional and bonafide. The delay may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice, failing which

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

e-filed return of income on 29/03/2016 declaring net taxable income at Rs. 76,94,280/-. In the return of income assessee has shown income from Salary, income from house property, income from business and income from other sources. The assessee has also shown income from exempt capital gains from transfer of equity shares. 7 Shri Nandkumar Khatumal Harchandani

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

e-filed return of income on 14/01/2015 declaring net taxable income at Rs. 32,63,962/-. In the return of income assessee has shown income from Salary, income from house property, income from business and income from other sources. The assessee has also shown income from exempt capital gains from transfer of equity shares.\nThe assessee has purchased 422500 shares

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. [ As per the above said amendment, in sub-section (1) to section 54 of the Act, for the words “constructed, a residential house”, the words “constructed, one residential house” have been substituted w.e.f. 01.04.2015. 5.3.2 In the present case, the assessee purchased more than one residential flat vide two different sale deeds, i.e. two flats and claimed deduction

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

E‟ Bench in the case of S.B. Builders and Developers Vs. ITO 92011) 50 DTR 299. Fact being similar, so following the reasoning given in the aforesaid decision of various Benches of the Tribunal, we direct the authorities below to allow the claim of deduction u/s. 80P made by the assessee on enhanced income. Considering in the settled

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

section 2(22)(e) of the Act and ` 2,55,00,000, on account of short term capital gains on sale

SHABBIR AHMED AHMED ALI,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESMENT CENTRY, DELHI

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

E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 17/02/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2018–19. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “Ground No.1 That the Lower Authorities

VIKAS GUPTA ,INDORE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

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

capital gain assessable in their hands. Those returns have been accepted under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act. The assessments have attained finality. No notice under section 143(2) for scrutinizing the returns have been issued upon the assessee before the search carried out. Even the time limit for issuance of such notice have already been expired before