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

set the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on the grounds raised on merits and direct the AO to delete the addition of long term capital gains. 17. The assessee has also raised a ground challenging the validity of reopening of assessment. Since we have deleted the addition on merits, this legal ground becomes academic in nature and accordingly

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

set the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on the grounds raised on merits and direct the AO to delete the addition of long term capital gains. 17. The assessee has also raised a ground challenging the validity of reopening of assessment. Since we have deleted the addition on merits, this legal ground becomes academic in nature and accordingly

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

loss of long term capital gains from the shares on which security transaction is paid or payable against the long term capital gains earned from shares on which no security transaction is paid / payable. We thus hold accordingly. Thus, the ground of assessee is allowed.” 7. From the above extract from the said decision, it is evident that such set

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

loss of long term capital gains from the shares on which security transaction is paid or payable against the long term capital gains earned from shares on which no security transaction is paid / payable. We thus hold accordingly. Thus, the ground of assessee is allowed.” 7. From the above extract from the said decision, it is evident that such set

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

loss of long term capital gains from the shares on which security transaction is paid or payable against the long term capital gains earned from shares on which no security transaction is paid / payable. We thus hold accordingly. Thus, the ground of assessee is allowed.” 7. From the above extract from the said decision, it is evident that such set

VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

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

setting aside the assessment to make further enquiries is unjustified. The learned PCIT cannot term the impugned order passed as erroneous in the absence of any mistake found in the computation of income when all the details were before him. Thus, the impugned order passed under section 263 of the Act is unjustified, bad–in–law and likely

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

loss account and provisions of section 68 are not applicable to the facts of the case. Identical situation is prevailing in the case of the present appellant. The Hon’ble ITAT on the said order of the CIT u/s 263 11 ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR VS SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA decided the matter in favour of the assessee by giving

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

set off of long-term capital loss against short-term capital gains. 14. I.T.A. No. 79/Nag/2010 (ITAT, Nagpur) Plastic Surge

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

set off of long-term capital loss against short-term capital gains.\n14. I.T.A. No. 79/Nag/2010 (ITAT, Nagpur) Plastic Surge

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

set aside. 3.1 The appellant has further submitted that the erstwhile firm M/s. Vinayak Builders & Developers, Nagpur executed an agreement with M/s. Sandeep Dwellers Pvt. Ltd. Nagpur for development of its land on which a project named ―Omkar Gaurav‖ was launched having two phases. 1st Phase was completed in all respect during the year ended 31.03.2012 only but sale deeds

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

gains received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the original asset; (b) "long-term specified asset" for making any investment under this section during the period commencing from the 1st day of April, 2006 and ending with the 31st day of March, 2007, means any bond, redeemable after three years and issued on or after

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

capital gain arise, it is eligible for claiming deduction u/s. 54F. 5 Sanjay Gulabchand Gupta ITA no.210/Nag./2023 4.18 It is here that the assessee's wilful and deliberate tax avoidance comes to the fore. In the aforesaid reply as can be seen from the highlighted portion that the assessee claims that actual construction started during

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

set of facts, it is evident that the gain/loss on foreign exchange fluctuation is a capital receipt. It is also a fact that loss on account of foreign exchange fluctuation in the immediately8 preceding year was not claimed by the appellant in the return of income itself. Thus, the AO having not allowed the foreign exchange fluctuation loss

VASANT CO-OP SHETKARI GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 29/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Vasant Co-Op. Shetkari Ginning & Pressing Factory Limited; At. Yavatmal Road, Wani, Tq. Wani, Dist. Yavatmal-440 010 Pan : Aaaat1439M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pravin Gandhi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr

set aside. 2) Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward-III, Yavatmal is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as the assessment order was passed after due verification and hence there is no situation which of invoking provisions of section

DAYAL AGRO PRODUCTS LTD,AKOLA vs. JCIT, AKOLA RANGE, AKOLA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

loss can be carried forward for maximum period of 8 years, to be set off against future capital short term gain

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

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

loss on the basis of evidence directly submitted before him and without asking remand report to verify such evidence.\n6. Any other ground shall be prayed at the time of hearing.”\n3.\nIn ground no.1, relates to the action of the Assessing Officer in re-\nopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income

FATTESING PUNAJI DHABRE,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX – 2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Fattesing Punaji Dhabre Pcit – 2, Nagpur Plot No. 132, Chandan Nagar, Post Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Hanuman Nagar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440001. Maharashtra – 440009. [Pan: Bacpd6505Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Madhav Vichare, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

loss of `. 98,730/–. The assessing officer accepted the explanation and Fattesing Punaji Dhabre computation of long term capital gain without further verification and enquiries. The order passed by ld. Assessing Officer is silent on the basis of cost of acquisition and computation of long term capital gain remained unverified. The ld. PCIT was of the view that order passed

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

capital gain. The “partnership firm\" and \"partners\" are different\nentities as per Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer has misdirected\nhimself to understand the basic premise of ownership and has gone to tax the\nincome in their own hands.\n11.\nFurther, we observe that the P.N.B. Construction Company approached the\nAssessee for purchase of the built-up area