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

4 of the report. iii. Distinction of facts of chapter 5 of the report Details of Entry Operators involved in the syndicate and their modus operandi. None of the observations or assessment order refers to any of the details of entry operators and any nexus or connection of the assessee with any of such operator and hence the case

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

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

section 148 of the Act, assessee filed NIL return of income for the year under consideration i.e. A. Y. 2016-17. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment vide assessment order dated 24.08.2021 and assessed total income at Rs.2,67,14,897/- by making addition of Rs.2,67,14,897/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain (In short “LTCG”) arising

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

Gains from Business and Profession" shall be computed in accordance with either cash system of accounting or mercantile system of accounting. As per sub section (1) of section 128 of the 2013 Act a company is compulsorily required to follow mercantile system of accounting. The Appellant being a company is compulsory required to follow mercantile system of accounting with respect

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

Gains from Business and Profession" shall be computed in accordance with either cash system of accounting or mercantile system of accounting. As per sub section (1) of section 128 of the 2013 Act a company is compulsorily required to follow mercantile system of accounting. The Appellant being a company is compulsory required to follow mercantile system of accounting with respect

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

Gain (LTCG). Please explain in detail all such modes employed by you for providing accommodation entries. Ans. Sir, The modes employed by me for providing accommodation entries against commission are as under: 1. Subscription to share capital at premium:- Sir, in such cases shares of the companies of clients/beneficiaries are subscribed at high premium by the companies floated/managed/controlled

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022 ATUL YAMSANWAR (PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q) 31 Umesh Sadashiv Thakre Α.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 5 ITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022 VISHWAS CHAKNALWAR (PAN: ABDPC0828J) 6 Ν.Α. M/S A V REALITIES (PAN: ABFFA9554M) 2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that during the previous

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022 ATUL YAMSANWAR (PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q) 5 ITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022 VISHWAS CHAKNALWAR (PAN: ABDPC0828J) 6 Ν.Α. M/S A V REALITIES (PAN: ABFFA9554M) 2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that during the previous hearing on 18/02/2025, this office had filed written submission wherein confidential letters having F.No. Addl

LOKMANYA TILAD JANAKALYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

gains of business or profession. However as it has already been held by me in ground no. 2 to 4 that assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 this argument of the appellant is not tenable. The requirement to deduct tax at source does not exclude entities which are exempted u/s :11. The intent of the legislature was that

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

capital gains and interest etc. The return of income u/s. 139(1) was filed on 17-02-2012 declaring total income of Rs. 10,36,730/-. Intimation u/s. 143(1) was issued on 7-6-2012 accepting the returned income. A search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 26-7-2016 in the case

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

capital gains and interest etc. The return of income u/s. 139(1) was filed on 17-02-2012 declaring total income of Rs. 10,36,730/-. Intimation u/s. 143(1) was issued on 7-6-2012 accepting the returned income. A search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 26-7-2016 in the case

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ATUL YAMSANWAR\nΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022\n(PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q)\n31\nUmesh Sadashiv Thakre\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19,\n2019-20 & 2020-21\n5\nITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022\n6\nΝ.Α.\nVISHWAS CHAKNALWAR\n(PAN: ABDPC0828J)\nM/S A V REALITIES\n(PAN: ABFFA9554M)\n2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

capital gains and interest etc. The return of income u/s. 139(1) was filed on 17-02-2012 declaring total income of Rs. 10,36,730/-. Intimation u/s. 143(1) was issued on 7-6-2012 accepting the returned income. A search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 26-7-2016 in the case

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

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 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 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

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