ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.CIRCLE-7, NAGPUR vs. M/S BALLARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD., GURGAON

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Acit, Circle-7, M/S Ballarpur Industries Ltd., Room No. 521, 5Th Floor, First India Palace, Gurgao Road, Mecl Building, Haryana Nagpur Vs. Pan : Aaacb5343E

exempt income without appreciating the fact that the 3 Assessment Year: 2008-09 assessee has not proved nexus between the owned interest fee funds and investment? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) was right in allowing depreciation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

exemption u/s 11 of the IT Act. 4. Any other ground that may be raised during the hearing.‖ 18 Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha A.Y. 2017–18, 2018–19 & 2019–20 26. Ground no.1, raised by the Revenue relates to whether or not the learned CIT(A) was justified in allowing depreciation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

exemption u/s 11 of the IT Act. 4. Any other ground that may be raised during the hearing.‖ 18 Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha A.Y. 2017–18, 2018–19 & 2019–20 26. Ground no.1, raised by the Revenue relates to whether or not the learned CIT(A) was justified in allowing depreciation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

exemption u/s 11 of the IT Act. 4. Any other ground that may be raised during the hearing.‖ 18 Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha A.Y. 2017–18, 2018–19 & 2019–20 26. Ground no.1, raised by the Revenue relates to whether or not the learned CIT(A) was justified in allowing depreciation

ACIT ,CIRCLE (EXEMPTION ),NAGPUR , NAGPUR vs. M/S SIPNA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL ,AMRAVAI , AMRAVATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Acit, Vs. M/S. Sipnashikshan Prasarak Mandal Circle (Exemption), Badnera Road Amravati Amravati Pan No.:Aacts 1266 J Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shripiyushkolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shrihimeshdemble (Ca) Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A)-4, Nagpur Dated 27/03/2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2013-14 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

EXEMPTION), NAGPUR VS SIPNA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, AMRAVATI TOTAL 22,74,36,186 LESS: 15% TO BE KEPT ASIDE 3,41,15,428 3,41,15,428 85% AMOUNT OF GROSS RECEIPTS TO BE APPLIED A 19,33,20,758 LESS: AMOUNT ACTUALLY APPLIED DURING THE YEAR FOR OBJECT OF THE TRUST 1. REVENUE EXPENDITURE 16,77,59,515 (EXCLUDING

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, NAGPUR vs. SONU MONU AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, Department's appeal stands dismissed

depreciation of Rs 4,20,23,114/- is accepted. 2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy (1957) [32 ITR 466] held that, income derived from some measure of cultivation of land with some expenditure of human skill and labour, renders the profit derived from the product agriculture income which would

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

exempted. However, the capital receipt shall not be subject to tax unless expressly taxed. A question arises as to whether the sales tax subsidy received from the State Government under the Scheme is a capital receipt or revenue receipt. 3.7.1. Capital receipt not subject to tax: The Bombay High Court, being Jurisdictional High Court, in Sadichha Chitra

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

exempted. However, the capital receipt shall not be subject to tax unless expressly taxed. A question arises as to whether the sales tax subsidy received from the State Government under the Scheme is a capital receipt or revenue receipt. 3.7.1. Capital receipt not subject to tax: The Bombay High Court, being Jurisdictional High Court, in Sadichha Chitra

SHREE HINDU SMASHAN SANSTHA,AMRAVATI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2, EXEMPTIONS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

Exemptions, Nagpur Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 01/08/2024 Date of Order – 06/08/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The instant appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 22/12/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned

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

exemption under section 54F, even if the assessee has owned one residential house as on the date of transfer, other than the new asset, or purchase in investments any residential house other than the new asset within a period of one year or three years as the case may be, but after the date of transfer of the original asset

DEENDAYAL SEVA PRATISHTHAN,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD-4, EXEMPTION, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

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

Exemption, Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Kishore B. Phadke Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 04/03/2025 Date of Order – 21/03/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The instant appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order dated 30/08/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

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

exemption under section 10A. On this position, in the present case it cannot be disputed that the net consequence of the disallowance of the employer‟s and the employee‟s contribution is that the business profits have to that extent been enhanced. There was, as we have already noted, an add back by the Assessing Officer to the income

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

depreciable asset. It was further observed by the Pr. CIT that the failure on the part of the Assessing Officer in not making a reference to the valuation officer of the Department for ascertaining the correct cost of acquisition of the factory land as on 01.04.1981, and summarily accepting the ‘cost of acquisition’ as was shown by the assessee

KRUSHI VIBHAG KARMCHARI VRUND SAHAKARI PATH SANSTHA MARYADIT ,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Vrund Sahakari Pat Sanstha Wardha Maryadit Bajaj Building, Krushna Nagar, Wardha, Maharashtra – 442001 Pan: Aacak6196N Appellant Respondent

depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The 9 Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vrund Sah Pat Sanstha Maryadit Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Shivanand Electronics (supra) dealt with the requirement of filing audit report for the purpose of claiming deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR vs. M/S. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED , GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Acit Vs. M/S.Bilt Graphic Paper Products Ltd. Circle-5 First India Place, Tower ‘C’, Mehrauli – Gurgaon Nagpur Road, Gurgaon-Haryana 122 022 Pan No.:Aadcb 2230 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani Adv. Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) 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 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Dated 30.03.2017 In Appeal No Cit(A)-4/59/15-16. Grounds Of Appeal Of Revenue For Assessment Year 2011-12 Are As Under :

depreciation of earlier years. Tax is 3 ACIT CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR VS M/S. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PRODUCTS LTD. charged u/s 115JB of Income Act 1961 on book profit determined 3. Against the order passed by the Assessing officer, assessee appealed before learned CIT(A) wherein detailed submission were made to submit that various addition made in assessment framed are unjustified

PREMJEET SINGH,DABHA NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation and related costs for commuting to the office which was not paid separately by the company. The company has paid us for visiting the clients but not for commuting to office. We agree with the proposed adjustment and accept the same for the best interest of the department. However, we hereby request to waive any penalty u/s 270A since

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

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

depreciation of Rs. 47,53,025/-. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of unsecured loans being unexplained credits Rs. 6,45,38,278/-. 5 M/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. & Group Cases 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

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

depreciation of Rs. 47,53,025/-. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of unsecured loans being unexplained credits Rs. 6,45,38,278/-. 5 M/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. & Group Cases 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned