ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COAL(INDIA) LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COAL(INDIA) LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIR 2(3) R, NAGPUR vs. M GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHERIES LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA GLOBAL RESOURCES LTD(EAELIER KNOWN AS GUPTA COALFIELDS 7 WASHHERIES LTD), NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT.C,I,.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHERIES LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COAL(INDIA) LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA GLOBAL RESOURCES LTD(EAELIER KNOWN AS GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHHERIES LTD), NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COAL(INDIA) LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA GLOBAL RESOURCES LTD(EAELIER KNOWN AS GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHHERIES LTD), NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

depreciation on wind mill. Since we have dismissed the issues while deciding the issues in Revenue‟s appeal, ground Nos. 6 and 7 of cross objections are allowed. 19. Ground No.8 is general in nature and hence, requires no adjudication. 20. In the result, cross objection (16/NAG/2014) filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 Group

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

depreciation in the value of foreign exchange currency held by it, on conversion into another currency, such profit or less would ordinarily be trading profit or loss if the foreign exchange currency is held by the assessee on revenue account of a trading asset or as part of circulating capital in the business. But, if on the other hand

TERRA INFRA DEVELOPMENT LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

94,104, by disallowing interest on TDS and depreciation. 4. The Assessing Officer made addition in respect to disallowance of interest on TDS and depreciation as discussed in the assessment order. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceeding under section 270A of the Act against the disallowance made in the assessment order on account of underreporting of income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. AAKAR HOTELS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

94,249/- 80,000/- 30,00,000/- 12,00,000/- vi. Therefore, the claim of the assessee that there was no transfer of property is totally wrong and hence assessee's plea was rejected by Assessing officer. vii. Therefore, in view of the above it can be concluded that there was transfer of property and the assessee has earned LTCG

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

94,808 9,481 M/s, Shradha Ginning & Pressing 20,333 2,033 15 Factory 16 M/s. Kapil Industries 5,425 543 17 Maa Vaishnavi Udyog 20,000 2,000 18 Mukesh Ramchand Motwani 550 - 19 Nikhil Bharat Shah 1,21,667 12,167 20 Nikita Tushar Shah 1,21,667 12,167 21 Pannalal Sumerchand

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

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 the Ld. CIT(A). Due to non-compliance to the various notices issued, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of 2 the assessee and confirmed the addition

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