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

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 8. It is observed that the appellant has issued 2,00,000 shares each of face value Rs. 10/- to its existing shareholders on a premium of Rs.40/- per share. Thus, the issue price per share stands at Rs.50/-. As the appellant did not furnish any report

VIJAYKUMAR ROOPLALJI JAISWAL,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal, 46, Middle Ring Road, East Wardhaman Nagar, ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440008, Maharashtra. Pan–Abrpj7368Q V/S A.C.I T. Circle–4, ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.K.P. Dewani, A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.Dr

section 234A, 234C and 234C of I.T. Act 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 5. Any other ground that shall be prayed at the time of hearing.” 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assessee has filed an application

IMPERAIAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

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

delay is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose off the appeals on merit. SS 3 Imperial Construction Company 4. The only issue which arose in both these appeal relates to addition of ` 12,42,000 for A.Y. 2007–08 and ` 10,50,000, for A.Y. 2009–10, on account of unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income

IMPERAIAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A

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

delay is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose off the appeals on merit. SS 3 Imperial Construction Company 4. The only issue which arose in both these appeal relates to addition of ` 12,42,000 for A.Y. 2007–08 and ` 10,50,000, for A.Y. 2009–10, on account of unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income

AKSHAY DEVIDAS TAJANE,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD -1, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms indicated above

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

delay in filing Denial of relief u/s 90 2. 253 Form no.67, should have been at ` 1,94,852 condoned. 2 Shri Akshay Devidas Tajane ITA no.161/Nag./2025 The CPC/Addl. JCIT(A)–1, Guru– gram is not justified in denying Denial of relief u/s 90 3. 253 the relief under section 90, at ` 1,94,852 without giving any reason

JANKALYAN SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,TUMSAR vs. ITO WARD - 1, BHANDARA, BHANDARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

delay being minor, the same is hereby condoned. 4. The short issue that we need to adjudication relates to addition under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on account of interest income earned from Nationalised Bank by treating it as income from other sources. 5. The assessee is a Society registered under the Maharashtra Co– operative Societies

THE ISMAILIA URBAN CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1

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

67,183 4 Dharampeth Mahila Bank – FDR 5,04,650 5 Pusad Urban Co-operative Bank – FDR 13,44,339 TOTAL Rs. 99,94,952 Net surplus of the Assessee society was of Rs.74,00,363/- which was claimed as deduction u/s 80P. Assessee claimed deduction u/s 70P of Rs.74,00,363 under Section

UTKARSHA SANSTHA,AMRAVATI vs. CIT EXMPTION, PUNE

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, Am

condonation of delay The CIT(E) has passed ex-parte order for registration or approval or rejection or cancellation in Form No. 10AD on 02/03/2024. The said order was received in the office of counsel Adv. Smt. Shruti Joshi, in the last week of April 2024. Mother in law of the counsel Adv. Smt. Shruti Joshi aged about 88 years

UTKARSHA SANSTHA,AMRAVATI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, Am

condonation of delay The CIT(E) has passed ex-parte order for registration or approval or rejection or cancellation in Form No. 10AD on 02/03/2024. The said order was received in the office of counsel Adv. Smt. Shruti Joshi, in the last week of April 2024. Mother in law of the counsel Adv. Smt. Shruti Joshi aged about 88 years

SAGAR FIBRES PVT. LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

condone the delay in filing the present appeal. We also find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 10/01/2022, passed in M.A. no.21 of 2022, in M.A. no.665 of 2021, in Suo-Motu Writ Petition (Civil) no.3 of 2020, the limitation period for filing the appeal was extended upto 29/05/2022. In view of the above, since the present

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year