RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

section 10(38). The AO prepared summary of working of capital gain in respect of both the scrips. The AO recorded that assessee purchased 40000 share of Premier Capital Services Ltd. in August, 2012 and sold the same scrip during May and June, 2014 and have shown capital gain of `. 8.42 crore. Similarly, for Kailash Auto Finance

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

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

Capital Gain Less: Exemption: Under section 54 – ` 34,05,731 invested in Residential Property (With a period of 1 year

M/S SHREE TRADERS ,BULDHANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

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

54,47,074/- which is a loss as per the computation of income for the year under consideration and sought set off of this business loss against the capital gain income shown. According to the AO, no business income could be set off against carry forward business loss for A.Y. 2013-14 within the meaning of section

SMT . RAJANI SURENDRA ADAMANE ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrysmt. Rajani Surendra Ito, Ward-4(4), Nagpur Adamane, Plot No.30, Near Ghodke School Surendra Vs. Nagar, Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur-440024. Pan: Alapa 9897 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 54(2) and observed that the Assessee has not deposited the amount of unutilized in the capital gain in scheme

SHRIRAM NARAYAN TIKDE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX, WARD 4(4) , NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

capital gains of Rs.73,041 offered by the assessee. In doing so, the learned AO erred in not providing benefit of indexed cost of improvement of Rs.4,55,185 incurred during FY 2006-07, brokerage fees on sale of plot of Rs.25,000 and deduction under section 54

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

SMT. VEENA MAHESHWARI ,NAGPUR vs. DY.C.I.T,CIRCLE-1,NAGPUR , NAGPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.323/Nag/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Smt.Veena Maheshwari, The Dy.Cit, Circle-1, 2Nd Floor, 52/2, Kinkhede Lay Vs. Nagpur. Out, Temple Road, Nagpur – 440001. Pan: Abxpm 3150 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe – Dr Date Of Hearing 16/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2023 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Nagpur’S Dated 11.05.2017 In Case No.Cit(A)-1/148/2014-15, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

54 has been given facade of capital gains earning when they, in fact, pertain to business income as per provisions of section

PRITAM SINGH CHARAN SINGH GUJJAR,NAGPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

54,590. The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was issued on 20/09/2016, which was duly served on the assessee on 23/09/2016. Subsequently, Notice u/s 142(1) was also issued to the assessee. Further in response to notice

MAHESHKUMAR BADRIBISHAL BHARTIYA,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1,, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Shri Ajitkumar Badriprasad Bhartiya Dcit, Circle –1 A–704, Anandam World City, Vs Bsnl–Rttc Building, Umred Road, Ganeshopeth, Seminary Hills, Nagpur – 440018. Nagpur – 440001. [Pan: Abbpb0801G] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

capital gain in purchase of two adjoining / adjacent flat and claimed exemption under section 54F. The assessing officer allowed exemption in respect of only one flat and disallowed in respect of adjoining flat, whereby assessing officer, out of total exemption under section 54F disallowed `. 13,54

SHRI AJITKUMAR BADRIPRASAD BHARTIYA,NAGPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Shri Ajitkumar Badriprasad Bhartiya Dcit, Circle –1 A–704, Anandam World City, Vs Bsnl–Rttc Building, Umred Road, Ganeshopeth, Seminary Hills, Nagpur – 440018. Nagpur – 440001. [Pan: Abbpb0801G] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

capital gain in purchase of two adjoining / adjacent flat and claimed exemption under section 54F. The assessing officer allowed exemption in respect of only one flat and disallowed in respect of adjoining flat, whereby assessing officer, out of total exemption under section 54F disallowed `. 13,54

MULCHAND JAGANATH RAGIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

capital gains arising from sale of immovable property under section 45 r.w.s50C at Rs. 11,54,870. 4. The learned

TUSHAR AMBADAS PATIL ,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NAGPUR -1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.44/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Tushar Patil, The Principal C/O.Nilesh Toshniwal, Vs Commissioner Of G-004, Smruti Apartments, Income Tax, Nagpur-1. Opp.Dnc, Congress Nagar, Nagpur – 440015. Pan: Ajwpp2501N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri.Saket Bhatted - Advocate Revenue By Shri Kailash G.Kanojiya– Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 26/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Nagpur-1 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 14.01.2019 Emanating From The Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 Dated 31.03.2017. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Tushar Ambadas Patil [A]

Capital Gain in the Return of Income for A.Y.2015-16 and claimed benefit of Section 54 purchasing another property. The ld.Pr.CIT

MULCHAND JAGANATH RAGIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

capital gains arising from sale of immovable property under section 45 r.w.s 50C at Rs.11,54,870. 2 Mulchand Jaganath

ANANT RAMRAO CHAVAN,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMRAVATI

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

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

capital gain assessed at ` 96,90,000, and demand raised of ` 32,48,488, vide order passed under section 143(3) r/w section 147 of the Act. 3 Anant Ramrao Chavhan 4. It is noted that the date of service of assessment order was 19/01/2020; and the appeal filed before the learned CIT(A) is 10/12/2021. Thus, there

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

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.

Capital Gain. 2 Kunda Gayakwad ITA no.403/Nag./2025 2. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, Learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing the deduction under section 54

INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

54,22,000/- out of which Rs. 50,39,500/- was paid to the NRI. As per the provisions of section 195 of the Act, the assessee is required to deduct tax at source on payments made to non-residents. In the instant case, the assessee required to deduct the tax at source on the sums chargeable to capital gains

M/S INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

54,22,000/- out of which Rs. 50,39,500/- was paid to the NRI. As per the provisions of section 195 of the Act, the assessee is required to deduct tax at source on payments made to non-residents. In the instant case, the assessee required to deduct the tax at source on the sums chargeable to capital gains