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

47,915/- (Income from Firm) was not adjusted as it was the Loss carried forward from Specified business. Assessing Officer further disallowed the claim u/s 54F arising on Sale of Factory at Rs.2,15,00,000/- on which Assessee had Capital Gain at Rs. 1,58,64,162/-. This Capital Gain was claimed exempt u/s 54F. This Capital Gain

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. AAKAR HOTELS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

gains' is that there should be a\ncapital asset, Then the capital asset is to be transferred within the\nmeaning of section 2(47) of the Act and it is chargeable to tax as per section\n45 of the Act.\nxiii.\nHere Sec 2(47) of IT Act is quoted below for reference :-\nSection 2(47) in The Income

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

47[any consideration received in cash or by a cheque or draft or by any other mode] shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset : Provided that the provisions of this sub-section shall not apply where the assessee transfers his share

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR vs. SHRI ASHOK VASANTRAI TRIVEDI , NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

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

v) of section 2(47) of the Act are satisfied, by inferring so, such possession constitutes transfer u/s. 2(47) of the Act, determined Long Term Capital Gain

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR vs. SHRI AJAY VASANTRAI TRIVEDI , NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

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

v) of section 2(47) of the Act are satisfied, by inferring so, such possession constitutes transfer u/s. 2(47) of the Act, determined Long Term Capital Gain

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

gains by understatement of the consideration. This was real object and purpose of the enactment of sub-section (2) and the interpretation of this sub-section must fall in line with the advancement of that object and purpose. We must, therefore, accept as the underlying assumption of subsection (2) that there is understatement of consideration in respect of the transfer

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

47,12,803/- [Rs. 2,65,00,000/- + Rs. 82,12,803/-] as discussed in Para-5 and 6 above are deleted, and the Ground No. 1 is allowed. 7.0 Ground No. 2 : This addition made pertains to prior period adjustment of Rs. 23,86,382/-. During the year under consideration, the appellant has incurred certain expenditure

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

capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall be made in respect of such excess." 11. For computing the income under the head 'business income certain deductions are allowed from such business income and one such deduction is laid down in section 36(1) (vii) of the Act. The said section provides

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

capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall be made in respect of such excess." 11. For computing the income under the head 'business income certain deductions are allowed from such business income and one such deduction is laid down in section 36(1) (vii) of the Act. The said section provides

SHRI PRALHAD CHODHARY ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.164/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Pralhadchodhary, The Assistant Commissioner Choudhary Bhawan, V Of Income Tax, Central Sakkardara, S Circle-1(3), Nagpur. Nagpur – 440032. Pan: Ahepc0847Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Umang Agrawal – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 23/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25/01/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nagpur Dated 18.03.2013 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 153C R.W.S143(3) Dated 29.12.2010 For A.Y.2007-08. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Shri Pralhad Chodhary [A]

section 153C r.w.s143(3) dated 29.12.2010 for A.Y.2007-08. The grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are as under : Shri Pralhad Chodhary [A] “1. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in holding that the capital gain arose u/s 2(47)(v

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, NAGPUR vs. M/S RAGHAV FINVEST PVT LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 2(24)(xvi)." ii. CBDT vide its Instruction No. 2/2015 dated 29/01/2015 has accepted the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court and clarified the same as under. "In reference to the above cited subject, I am directed to draw your attention to the decision of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Vodafone India Services

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. M/S NIHAL GITS PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 2(24)(xvi)." ii. CBDT vide its Instruction No. 2/2015 dated 29/01/2015 has accepted the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court and clarified the same as under. "In reference to the above cited subject, I am directed to draw your attention to the decision of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Vodafone India Services

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. VISHNU GILTS PVT.LT, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 2(24)(xvi)." ii. CBDT vide its Instruction No. 2/2015 dated 29/01/2015 has accepted the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court and clarified the same as under. "In reference to the above cited subject, I am directed to draw your attention to the decision of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Vodafone India Services

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

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

47,052\nNet Sale Consideration\n*18,459\n16,45,46,955\n16,45,65,414\nCapital Gains\n*15,354\n16,36,74,245\n16,36,89,599\n3.\nThe assessee has claimed deduction u/s 54F, being investment made in\n\"Capital Gain Scheme” for an amount of Rs. 15,78,88.855/-\n4.\nThe assessee, had applied for withdrawal

ITO, WARD- 4,, CHANDRAPUR vs. M/S. K.S.R. TRANSPORT COMPANY,, CHANDRAPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.364/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant M/S.Ksr Transport, Commissioner Of Income V Padoli Chadda Building, Tax, Chandrapur Circle, S Kosara Road, Chandrapur. Chandrapur. Pan: Aabfk3222D Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Objection No.02/Nag/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.364/Nag/2019) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S.Ksr Transport, The Assistant Padoli Chadda Building, V Commissioner Of Income Kosara Road, Chandrapur. S Tax, Chandrapur Circle, Pan: Aabfk3222D Chandrapur. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mukesh Agrawal – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-2, Nagpur Dated 28.08.2019 Emanating From

V Commissioner of Income Kosara Road, Chandrapur. s Tax, Chandrapur Circle, PAN: AABFK3222D Chandrapur. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Mukesh Agrawal – AR Revenue by Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.DR Date of hearing 30/11/2023 Date of pronouncement 09/01/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of ld.CIT

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SUDHIR RAMSWAROOP SARDA , NAGPUR

2,52,47,265/- made by the AO on sale\nproceeds of the share u/s 68 of the I.T. Act., without appreciating the fact that\nas per investigation done by income tax Department (Inv), Kolkata dated\n27.04.2015, specific findings in reference to transactions in the scrip M/s\nLuminarie Technologies Ltd clearly establishing the fact that the scrip was a\npenny

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

V Aar Pee Apartment P Ltd, (2009) 319 ITR 276 (Del)] 12. The above fact is a clear pointed that by no means the addition could have been made on the basis of the departmental valuation report. No enquiry whatsoever has been conducted by the AO to positively come to a conclusion that such an expenditure was incurred outside

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

V Aar Pee Apartment P Ltd, (2009) 319 ITR 276 (Del)] 12. The above fact is a clear pointed that by no means the addition could have been made on the basis of the departmental valuation report. No enquiry whatsoever has been conducted by the AO to positively come to a conclusion that such an expenditure was incurred outside