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

54 Profit on sale of properly used for residence: i) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), where in the case of an assessee being an individual or a Hindu Undivided Family, the 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

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3),, NAGPUR vs. M/S. 21ST CENTURY INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

54,40,000 as income from other sources. 2.7 Aggrieved by the order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Hon’bleCIT(A) and submitted the facts of the case before the Hon’ble CIT(A) and contended the applicability of section 56(2)(viib). 2.8 The Hon’ble CIT(A) agreed with the contentions of the assessee and provided relief

ITO, WARD-6(1),, NAGPUR vs. THE VIDARBHA PREMIER CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY,, NAGPUR

In the result these appeals by the assessee and revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

54,397/- are not ancillary and incidental to the main activity of business of providing credit facilities to its members, and as such, profits attributable to these incomes amounting to Rs.48,39,540.00 are not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). 3. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A)-II, Nagpur, was right

THE VIDHARBHA PREMIER CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,,NAGPUR vs. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, RANGE-6, NAGPUR

In the result these appeals by the assessee and revenue stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

54,397/- are not ancillary and incidental to the main activity of business of providing credit facilities to its members, and as such, profits attributable to these incomes amounting to Rs.48,39,540.00 are not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). 3. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A)-II, Nagpur, was right

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

2) The learned A.O. erred in making addition on account of unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the I.T. Act at Rs.56,54,511/- in the absence of any evidence on record merely on basis of surmise and conjecture. The addition made is unjustified and arbitrary. 3) The learned A.O. and Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have held that

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

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

section 54 – ` 34,05,731 invested in Residential Property (With a period of 1 year before the date of transfer / sale) 0” Therefore, notice u/s.142(1) of the I.T. Act issued to the assessee on 05/03/2021. The assessee was asked to furnish evidences of indexed cost of improvement of Rs.23,62,675/- claimed in the working capital gain. In response

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

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

I.T.O. WARD -3(5), NAGPUR vs. SHRI MUKUNDRAO GOVINDRAO MANKAR, KATOL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

54,45,000 after giving a rebate of Rs. 25,000 to the income of the assessee as income chargeable to tax under section 56(2)(v).In the said set of facts, it has been held as under: We are, however, unable to find any material being brought on record by the revenue to support these findings, hence

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

A,C.I.T. (EXEMPTION), NAGPUR vs. M/S VIDARBHA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

capital expenditure and other expenditure of appellant institution as per Audit statements on its objects. Considering financial statements expenditure incurred by appellant institution can not be termed as meager as observed by A.O. more so where A.O. himself at para 11 of page 9 has observed in tabulation that percentage of amount spent on cricket including establishment expenses

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

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

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

54,918/- being gain/ loss on foreign exchange fluctuation holding it a capital receipt without appreciating the fact that assessee company itself credited the amount as revenue receipt treating the same as revenue receipt. Whether the assessee has shown fluctuation as a capital receipt in earlier year is not relevant. The Id. CIT(A) has relied on the decision

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

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

2). 5.The learned AO erred in not providing benefit of deduction claimed under section 54 by making investment of Rs.17,00,000 in construction of new residential property at Janaki Nagar, within prescribed period of time. The capital gains