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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

30 of the I.T. Act. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the Department has not filed any supporting evidence/ rebuttal against the written submission Id. AR of the assessee except arguing that the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the above expenditure. We find on perusal of evidence on record that

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

Section 30 of the I.T. Act. Taking into 30 ACIT, CIRCLE-7, NAGPUR VS M/s. Newquest Corporation Ltd. (Now known as Avantha Holdings Ltd) consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the Department has not filed any supporting evidence/ rebuttal against the written submission ld. AR of the assessee except arguing that

DCIT CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. M/S TRISTER RETAIL CONCEPTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, department’s appeal stands dismissed

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

30,99,807, under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by holding as under:- “4. Appellate Findings Appeal Notices were issued to the assessee on 26.12.2020, 17.08.2020 and 04.05.2023 fixing the case for 31.12.2020, 01.09.2022 and 11.05.2023. No reply filed by the Assessee so far, in such circumstances, the case of the assessee is being decided on the merits

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

30 of the I.T. Act. Taking into consideration\nthe above facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the Department\nhas not filed any supporting evidence/ rebuttal against the written submission\nId. AR of the assessee except arguing that the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting\nthe above expenditure. We find on perusal of evidence on record that

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

30-11-2015 for the assessment year under consideration, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB. The AO has not brought on record any reason to deviate and not to follow the order of the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a case wherein proceedings u/s.132 was conducted

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

30-11-2015 for the assessment year under consideration, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB. The AO has not brought on record any reason to deviate and not to follow the order of the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a case wherein proceedings u/s.132 was conducted

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

30-11-2015 for the assessment year under consideration, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB. The AO has not brought on record any reason to deviate and not to follow the order of the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a case wherein proceedings u/s.132 was conducted

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

30-11-2015 for the assessment year under consideration, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB. The AO has not brought on record any reason to deviate and not to follow the order of the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a case wherein proceedings u/s.132 was conducted

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

30-11-2015 for the assessment year under consideration, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB. The AO has not brought on record any reason to deviate and not to follow the order of the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a case wherein proceedings u/s.132 was conducted

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

30-11-2015 for the assessment year under consideration, I find that the Hon'ble ITAT has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB. The AO has not brought on record any reason to deviate and not to follow the order of the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a case wherein proceedings u/s.132 was conducted

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

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

section debars appellant from claiming double application of income vis-à-vis depreciation, if the appellant has already claimed capital expenditure as an application of income. It was submitted as well as demonstrated by the appellant, that in a given year the appellant has only claimed depreciation as an application of income and in the given year also they have

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

section debars appellant from claiming double application of income vis-à-vis depreciation, if the appellant has already claimed capital expenditure as an application of income. It was submitted as well as demonstrated by the appellant, that in a given year the appellant has only claimed depreciation as an application of income and in the given year also they have

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

section debars appellant from claiming double application of income vis-à-vis depreciation, if the appellant has already claimed capital expenditure as an application of income. It was submitted as well as demonstrated by the appellant, that in a given year the appellant has only claimed depreciation as an application of income and in the given year also they have

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

30-10-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 25-01-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2007-08. 2 ITA No. 69/NAG/2019, A.Y. 2007-08 2. The assessee raised two grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates

THE BULDHANA DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD ,BULDHANA vs. DCIT, AKOLA CIRCLE , AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation at ` 21,22,803. In this return of income, brought forward loss for the assessment year 2008–09 is claimed at ` 5,01,70,769, and for the assessment year 2009-10 at ` 2,61,43,904, and also claimed carried forward loss for the assessment year 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. The income for the assessment

M/S UNIVERSAL DRINKS PVT . LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CIR. -2, NAGPUR

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

depreciation. Accounts of assessee-company were certified by auditors as having been maintained in accordance with provisions of the Companies Act. The object of introducing section 115J can be deduced from the Budget Speech of Finance Minister made in Parliament while introducing the said section. The Speech shows that the income-tax authorities were unable to bring certain companies within

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , AKOLA

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

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

30 days. The said repayment was also verified from the Ledger Account and the Bank Statement. 10. In view of aforesaid undisputed fact with regard to repayment of loan, at this juncture, it would be pertinent to take note of decision of this Court in case of Dy CIT v. Rohini Builders [2003] 127 Taxman 523/120021