DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

depreciation has been squarely decided by Hon’ble Bombay High court in assessee’s 14 Smt. AanjuSaraf sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas v/s CIT, vide Income Tax AppealsNo.21& 22 of 2011, order dated 18thJuly 2017 for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively, observed as under:- “12. In the present case

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

depreciation has been squarely decided by Hon’ble Bombay High court in assessee’s 14 Smt. AanjuSaraf sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas v/s CIT, vide Income Tax AppealsNo.21& 22 of 2011, order dated 18thJuly 2017 for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively, observed as under:- “12. In the present case

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

depreciation has been squarely decided by Hon’ble Bombay High court in assessee’s 14 Smt. AanjuSaraf sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas v/s CIT, vide Income Tax AppealsNo.21& 22 of 2011, order dated 18thJuly 2017 for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively, observed as under:- “12. In the present case

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

depreciation has been squarely decided by Hon’ble Bombay High court in assessee’s 14 Smt. AanjuSaraf sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas v/s CIT, vide Income Tax AppealsNo.21& 22 of 2011, order dated 18thJuly 2017 for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively, observed as under:- “12. In the present case

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

depreciation has been squarely decided by Hon’ble Bombay High court in assessee’s 14 Smt. AanjuSaraf sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas v/s CIT, vide Income Tax AppealsNo.21& 22 of 2011, order dated 18thJuly 2017 for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively, observed as under:- “12. In the present case

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

22 May, 2023. The brief facts and the ratio of the judgment is reproduced below : “2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed return of income for the year under consideration on 23-3-2017 declaring total income of Rs. 11,84,37,909. The return of income filed by the assessee

THE AMRAVATI PEOPLE CO-OP BANK LTD ( NOW MERGED IN THE COSMOS CO-OP BANK LTD),AMARAVATI vs. D.C.I.T. AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMARAVATI

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 309/Nag/2015 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Amravati Peoples Co-Op. Bank Limited (Now Merged In The Cosmos Co-Op. Bank Ltd.) C/O. Cosmos Co-Op Bank Ltd. Jawahar Road, Amravati-444601. Pan : Aaact5899B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Amravati Circle, Amravati. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri S.G. Gandhi, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Agnes P. Thomas, Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.05.2022

depreciation allowance, in the following manner, to the extent available" is as under:- Asst. Year Remarks S. Nature of Amount as Amount as No. loss/allowance ( returned (in assessed ( give rupees) in rupees) reference to relevant order) 1. 2002-03 Business loss 28858541 Not available 98748798 2. 2004-05 Business loss 36762850 -Do- 3479468 Total 10,22,28,266/- The assessment

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

22. Accordingly, nothing merits in the Revenue’s submission that entire exemption under section 11 of the Act should be revoked. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to grant exemption under section 11 of the Act to the assessee trust as already directed by the learned CIT(A). Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, ground

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

22. Accordingly, nothing merits in the Revenue’s submission that entire exemption under section 11 of the Act should be revoked. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to grant exemption under section 11 of the Act to the assessee trust as already directed by the learned CIT(A). Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, ground

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

22. Accordingly, nothing merits in the Revenue’s submission that entire exemption under section 11 of the Act should be revoked. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to grant exemption under section 11 of the Act to the assessee trust as already directed by the learned CIT(A). Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, ground

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AKOLA CIRCLE , AKOLA vs. THE BULDHANA DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LIMITED , BULDHANA

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

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

22,792, including unabsorbed depreciation of ` 32,80,263. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Income

ZIM LABORATORIES LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), 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. 99/Nag/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Zim Laboratories Ltd. Ground Floor, Sadodaya Gyan, Nelson Square, Opp. Nadt, Nagpur-440 013. Pan : Aaacz0200E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent

22,49,062/-, the Pr. CIT was of the view that the same had thus rendered his order as erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue within the meaning of Sec. 263 of the Act. Also, it was observed by the Pr. CIT that during the course of search and seizure proceedings conducted

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

depreciation, it clearly indicates the addition is made with the prejudice and unlawful way and therefore needs to be deleted. 18. Further not withstanding anything mentioned in above para, even otherwise, if the expenses on purchase of machines are disallowed, it would ultimately result in increase in gross total income, which is completely deductible under section 80P. Thus, the deduction

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

22. We have heard the submission of the learned counsel for the Assessee. As far as the excluding the subsidies in question from computation of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act is concerned, the provisions of sec. 115JB of the Act have to be looked at. Section 115JB of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in any other

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

22. We have heard the submission of the learned counsel for the Assessee. As far as the excluding the subsidies in question from computation of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act is concerned, the provisions of sec. 115JB of the Act have to be looked at. Section 115JB of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in any other

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

22)(e) of Rs.\n8,75,36,654/-.\n7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition made on account of disallowance of depreciation of Rs.\n47,53,025/-.\n8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition made

VISHAL KISHORILAL JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

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

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year and for which a prior notice under Section 148 would be required to be issued. Section 147 does not contemplate an eventuality which Section 153A or Section 153C contemplates, the basis of which is inter alia a search action under Section 132 being resorted as noted hereinabove. Thus

SHRI MAHESH DEVDUTTA GUPTA,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3),, NAGPUR

In the result, the addition so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

22,146/-. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the action of the learned authorities is unjustified. (7) That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming and upholding the action of AO in determining income from other sources at Rs. 30,34,619/-instead of Rs. 61,528/- determined by the assessee