DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. SHIKHA INDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

58,120/-. Case was selected for scrutiny, statutory notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and duly served upon the assessee. Ld.Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had declared long term capital gains (LTCG) of Rs.1,32,17,000/- and claimed the same as being exempt u/s 10(38) of Act in respect to shares

MUJIB SALMANBHAI PATHAN,,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.98/Nag/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 ......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Mujib Salmanbhai Pathan, House No.242, Ward No.2, Old Area, Wardha Road, Butibori, Nagpur-441108. Pan : Aefpp0269M. बनाम / V/S. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ……""यथ" / Respondent Circle-3, Nagpur. Assessee By : Shri Veena Agrawal Revenue By : Smt. Agnes P. Thomas. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 12.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Stating That The Subject, Whether Proper Approval Was Taken Before Converting Limited Scrutiny Into Complete Scrutiny Being Administrative Measure Cannot Be Taken Up. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Cit (A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs 1,00,85,013/- Made By The Ao As Income Under The Head Business & Profession Rightly Declared As Income Under The Head Capital Gains.

58,080/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,00,85,013/- being the profits arising out of the sale of land, treating as an income from business as against the claim of the appellant that it is a nature of capital gains. The factual background leading to the above additions as follows : The appellant along with

SHRI. ABDULLABHAI HASANALI,,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,-II, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

gains. The CIT, relying on certain decisions, opined that by allowing such set off of brought forward losses, there is loss of revenue and therefore, the CIT held the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The CIT drew parallel to the way the exempt agricultural income is treated in matters of such

ABDULLABHAI HASANALI THROUGH L/H ZOHRABAI,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-3,, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

gains. The CIT, relying on certain decisions, opined that by allowing such set off of brought forward losses, there is loss of revenue and therefore, the CIT held the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The CIT drew parallel to the way the exempt agricultural income is treated in matters of such

ABDULLABHAI HASANALI THROUGH L/H ZOHRABAI,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-3,, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

gains. The CIT, relying on certain decisions, opined that by allowing such set off of brought forward losses, there is loss of revenue and therefore, the CIT held the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The CIT drew parallel to the way the exempt agricultural income is treated in matters of such

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.5, NAGPUR vs. M/S AVANTHA HOLDINGS LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act 1961 cannot be invoked. The reasons for disallowance given by A.O. is unjustified and has correctly being held by CIT(A) to be not a valid reason for not allowing the claim of deduction. It is also noted that at the time of date of redemption due compliance of tax deducted at source

AVANTHA HOLDINGS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-5,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act 1961 cannot be invoked. The reasons for disallowance given by A.O. is unjustified and has correctly being held by CIT(A) to be not a valid reason for not allowing the claim of deduction. It is also noted that at the time of date of redemption due compliance of tax deducted at source

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR vs. AVANTHA HOLDINGS LIMITED, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act\n1961 cannot be invoked. The reasons for disallowance given by A.O. is\nunjustified and has correctly being held by CIT(A) to be not a valid reason for\nnot allowing the claim of deduction. It is also noted that at the time of date of\nredemption due compliance of tax deducted at source

VINAYAK JAGANNATH RAGIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), NAGPUR

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 gains arising from sale of immovable property under section 50C at Rs.35,58,500. 4. The learned AO erred

SHRI SHRI GURVINDER SINGH SASAN, L/H OF LATE SHRI JAGDISH SINGH SASAN,NAGPUR vs. THE ITO-WARD-2(2),, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh. Mahavir Singhsh. Gurvinder Singh Sasan, Vs Ito, L/H Of Late Sh. Jagdish Singh Sasan, Ward–2(2), C/O–Kasjmir Bar & Restaurant, 3Ed Floor, Ayakar Gaddogudam Chowk, Nagpur–440001. Bhawan, Nagpur Pan–Aeyps3694G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh.K.P.Dewani, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Jitesh Kumar Date Of Hearing 07.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2018

section 54 of the Act and thereby he computed long term capital gain at Rs.18,13,900/- and added to the returned income of the assessee. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A). 4. Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO by observing in par 10.7 as under:- 10.7. “As per the layout plan / map approved

VANDANA KISHOR NAIK ,NAGPUR vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vandana Kishor Naik Vs. Ito, Ward 5(3), Plot No.98, Jaibadrinath Society, Nagpur Behind Swavlambi Nagar, Khamla, Nagpur – 440025 Pan : Aalpn9942R Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri G.J. Ninawe Date Of Hearing 16-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09-12-2022

section 50C of the 2 Vandana Kishor Naik Act. We note that the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s findings to this effect reads as under : “Decision: 5.0 Ground No.1: Addition of Rs. 8,63,775/- Long Term Capital Gain: The submission of the appellant is considered and the assessment order is perused. The assessee entered

M/S SHREE STEEL CQASTINGS PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrym/S. Shree Steel Castings Dcit, Circle-1, Nagpur Pvt. Ltd., T/38/1, Midc, Vs. Hingna Road, Nagpur. Pan: Aaccs 4071 J (Appellant) (Respondent)

58,244/- to Rs. 82,932/- as disallowance u/sec. 14A of the Act. 5. The Assessee, thus being aggrieved, has preferred the instant appeal mainly challenging the reopening of the proceedings u/sec. 147 of the Act. The Assessee at the outset has claimed that in the reasons recorded dated 08/08/2013, the following issues were mentioned: 4 “(i) earning

DY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX , CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S N KUMAR CONSTRUCTION CO .PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

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

capital gain from sale of shares in view of astronomical difference between the share price of a company with a short span of 6-7 months and made addition to the income of the assessee. But in the case of assessee, the assessee has received the amounts towards booking advance against the sale of property and not received towards share

DY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX , CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S N KUMAR CONSTRUCTION CO .PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

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

58,12,500/- U/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provision of Section 68 is speak that ―Where any sum is found credited in the books of an appellant maintained nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the [Assessing] Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged income

SHRI VISHWAKARAMA JEWELLERS ,AKOLA vs. DCIT AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

58,55,236 Undisclosed investment in platinum jewellery ` 62,993 Total undisclosed investment ` 69,37,859 5. The learned CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal by holding as follows:– “Accordingly, the arguments of the appellant that the surrendered income is to be treated as its business income is not acceptable and the additions made u/s 69B is upheld. However

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

PRECISION COMPONENT HIGHTECH LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

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

58, Hingna Road, MIDC Industrial Area ……………. Appellant Hingna, Nagpur 440 016 PAN–AABCP8042P v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–2(2), Nagpur Assessee by : Ms. Shikha Loya Revenue by : Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya Date of Hearing – 26/08/2024 Date of Order – 02/09/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The captioned appeals have been filed