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

depreciation cannot be allowed as deduction as per the provision of section 11(6) of I.T. Act as double application of income. 2. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering the addition of Rs.37,50,000/- as regular income of the assessee, ignoring the facts that addition was made

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

depreciation cannot be allowed as deduction as per the provision of section 11(6) of I.T. Act as double application of income. 2. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering the addition of Rs.37,50,000/- as regular income of the assessee, ignoring the facts that addition was 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, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year): Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section

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

3) of the Act dated 31-12-2008. However he stated that since the claim of deduction u/s 80IB has been enhanced he has considered the same separately. The relevant portion is Para 10 of the Assessment order. The learned AR of the appellant placed on record, order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own 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

3) of the Act dated 31-12-2008. However he stated that since the claim of deduction u/s 80IB has been enhanced he has considered the same separately. The relevant portion is Para 10 of the Assessment order. The learned AR of the appellant placed on record, order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own 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

3) of the Act dated 31-12-2008. However he stated that since the claim of deduction u/s 80IB has been enhanced he has considered the same separately. The relevant portion is Para 10 of the Assessment order. The learned AR of the appellant placed on record, order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own 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

3) of the Act dated 31-12-2008. However he stated that since the claim of deduction u/s 80IB has been enhanced he has considered the same separately. The relevant portion is Para 10 of the Assessment order. The learned AR of the appellant placed on record, order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own 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

3) of the Act dated 31-12-2008. However he stated that since the claim of deduction u/s 80IB has been enhanced he has considered the same separately. The relevant portion is Para 10 of the Assessment order. The learned AR of the appellant placed on record, order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own 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

3) of the Act dated 31-12-2008. However he stated that since the claim of deduction u/s 80IB has been enhanced he has considered the same separately. The relevant portion is Para 10 of the Assessment order. The learned AR of the appellant placed on record, order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own case

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.

section 11 5BBC(3) of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Without prejudice to the above, the assessee humbly submits before your honour that except for a few instances, the Ld. A.O. has not recorded any concrete evidence but has merely casually stated that some of the donors were farmers who denied to have given the donation; some

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

depreciation under Section 32 of the Act. Because of this judgment, the legislature had to amend the provisions of Section 32 with effect from 1.4.1997 by using the expression “owned wholly or partly”. So the word “own” would not include a case where a residential house is partly owned by one person or partly owned by other person(s). After

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S SPACEWOOD FURNISHERS PVT. LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

depreciation 60% on the computer items has been disallowed by the AO by way of order passed under sec. 154 of the Act. It is also not in dispute that originally, the assessment was completed under sec. 143(3) of the Act, which was revised in pursuance to the order passed under sec. 250 of the Act. Section

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

3 & 4 of the Department are dismissed.”\n5. Since the issue for our adjudication is identical to the issue decided\nabove, consistent with the view taken therein, we dismiss the connected\nground(s) raised by the Revenue by upholding the impugned order passed by\nthe learned CIT(A) for both the years under consideration viz. A.Y. 2011-12\nand

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

3 & 4 of the Department are dismissed.”\n5. Since the issue for our adjudication is identical to the issue decided above, consistent with the view taken therein, we dismiss the connected ground(s) raised by the Revenue by upholding the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) for both the years under consideration

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

3 & 4 of the Department are dismissed.”\n5. Since the issue for our adjudication is identical to the issue decided above, consistent with the view taken therein, we dismiss the connected ground(s) raised by the Revenue by upholding the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) for both the years under consideration

SHARDA ISPAT LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

3 ITA No. 69/NAG/2019, A.Y. 2007-08 section 43(1) of the Act. In a recent decision of this Tribunal in the case of Inox Air Products Private Limited in ITA No. 1042/PUN/2017 for A.Y. 2014-15 held when the subsidy is not granted to meet the cost of any fixed asset and proviso to Explanation 10 of section

DREAMZ INFRASTRUCTURE ,AMRAVATI vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

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

depreciation as per Income Tax Act. The addition made by AO is without affording any opportunity to the assessee. The same be deleted. 3. That the C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 80,69,310/- at 5% on the allegation that amount is spent in respect of land contribution by 7 partners is unjust. In fact

BUCCS LTD. AND NBC AND JV,BULDHANA vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act or the same can be amortized by treating it as an allowable business expenditure under the relevant provisions of the Act. As per the previous details of ITR and records available of ITBA. It was observed that the assessee was claiming amortization expenses of Road construction regularly and return income

M/S. UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.45/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Unijules Life Sciences The Assistant Ltd., V Commissioner Of Income B-35/36, Midc, S Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Kamleshwar, Nagpur. Nagpur – 441501 Pan: Aaacu8032D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani – Adv.-Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 08.11.2011 For The A.Y.2012-13 Emanating From The Order Under Section 153A R.W.S 143(3) Of M/S.Unijule Life Sciences Ltd., [A]

section 153A r.w.s 143(3) of M/s.Unijule Life Sciences Ltd., [A] the Act, dated 30.03.2016. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1) The Assessment u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) is illegal, invalid and deserves to quashed in the interest of justice. 2) On the facts and circumstances