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

80,000 only. The 11 Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha A.Y. 2017–18, 2018–19 & 2019–20 Assessing Officer erred in denying entire claim of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. Therefore, we uphold the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and the grounds no.1 and 2, raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. The next issue

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

80,000 only. The 11 Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha A.Y. 2017–18, 2018–19 & 2019–20 Assessing Officer erred in denying entire claim of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. Therefore, we uphold the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and the grounds no.1 and 2, raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. The next issue

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

80,000 only. The 11 Jaymahakali Shikshan Sanstha A.Y. 2017–18, 2018–19 & 2019–20 Assessing Officer erred in denying entire claim of exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Act. Therefore, we uphold the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and the grounds no.1 and 2, raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 15. The next issue

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 of ` 32,80,263. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") on 11/01/2012

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

depreciation of ` 32,80,263. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") on 11/01/2012

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU AJAY SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the A

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

80-IA of the Act has the option to choose the initial/first year from which it may desire the claim of deduction for ten consecutive years, out of a slab of fifteen (or twenty years, as prescribed under that sub-section. It has been clarified that once such initial assessment year has been opted for by the tax- payer

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU AJAY SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the A

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

80-IA of the Act has the option to choose the initial/first year from which it may desire the claim of deduction for ten consecutive years, out of a slab of fifteen (or twenty years, as prescribed under that sub-section. It has been clarified that once such initial assessment year has been opted for by the tax- payer

MOONLIGHT STUDIO,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is DISMISSED

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

depreciation of ` 2,55,974. The due date of return was 17/10/2016. However, the assessee stated that due to heavy traffic on ITR e-filing site (incometaxindiaefiling. gov.in) and slow uploading, though the entire return was ready the same could not be uploaded before 12’o clock on 17/10/2016. The same was immediately uploaded after 12’o clock on same

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

section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as contended by the revenue by relying on the decision in the case of Appollo Tyres Ltd. (supra). 27. In this case since we have already held that in relevant assessment year 2010-11 the incentives "Interest subsidy' and 'Power subsidy' is a 'capital receipt and does not fall within the definition

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

section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as contended by the revenue by relying on the decision in the case of Appollo Tyres Ltd. (supra). 27. In this case since we have already held that in relevant assessment year 2010-11 the incentives "Interest subsidy' and 'Power subsidy' is a 'capital receipt and does not fall within the definition

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 898365 533995 769869 LESS: REVALUATION RESERVE 364370 TOTAL :– 2910067 2347951 PROFIT BEFORE EXCEPTIONAL AND 7180391 4537841 EXTRAORDINARY ITEMS LESS: LOSS ON SALE OF SHARES 1452500 – – (INVESTMENT) LOSS ON SALE OF SHARES (ASSETS) – – 2253149 PROFIT AFTER EXCEPTIONAL AND 5727891 2284692 EXTRAORDINARY ITEMS M/s. Universal Drinks Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.184/Nag./2016 4. During the course of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AKOLA CIRCLE , AKOLA vs. AKOLA URBAN CO-OPRATIVE BANK LTD , AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

depreciation for current year as well as preceding year. The assessee filed its revised return on 01/10/2015, claiming TDS which remained to be claimed in original return of income. There were no changes in income insofar as other claims are concerned. The case was selected for Scrutiny under CASS. The Assessing Officer concluded by passing order dated 27/12/2017, under section

TAJSHREE MOTORS PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roytajshree Motors Pvt. Ltd., Dict/Acit, Circle– 4, 17, Tajshree Estate, Vs Nagpur Nandanwan, Nagpur. Pan : Aacct 9187 G Assessee Respondent

80,400/- have been taken as gross receipts and estimated the gross profit @ 6.35% which comes to Rs. 3,54,88,905/-, in which depreciation of Rs. 60,60,315/- was deducted. Consequently, Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment making addition of Rs.2,94,28,950/-. 3. Aggrieved with the above addition, assessee preferred appeal before

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

In the result, Department's appeal stands dismissed

depreciation has to be allowed a twice the\nnormal rate\".\n12. For manufacturing/producing of mushrooms, one building is essentially\nneeded in which the mushrooms are manufactured in racks under certain\ndegree controlled temperature and in the absence of sunlight. This crop cannot\nbe grown on open land under the sunlight and under normal weather\nconditions. Therefore, it is literally manufactured

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

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

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

80,891/- and Rs. 74,32,292/-on the grounds of commercial expediency:- 4.1 With all humbleness we wish to submit that –“the expression commercial expediency is an expression of wide import and includes such expenditure as a prudent businessman incurs for the purpose of business. The expenditure may not have been incurred under any legal obligation