DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

long term capital gains generated on sale of M/s Shreenath Commercial & Finance Ltd was examined by the co-ordinate bench in the case of Mr Ripu Sudan Kundra vs. ITO (ITA No.2792/Mum/2018 dated 05-10-2021), wherein it was held as under:- Naresh Laxminarayan Grover ITA no.524, 525 & 526/Nag./2024 "We have given our anxious thought and consideration

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

disallow the claim of the assessee in respectof long term capital gain merely on the basis of information received from

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

disallow the claim of the assessee in respect of long term capital gain merely on the basis of information received

RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

disallowance of long term capital gain on sale of two impugned scrips by AO and confirmed by ld CIT(A) has been

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

disallowed and the entire long term capital gain of Rs.83,85,792/- has to be charged to tax which is added

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

gains received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the original asset; (b) "long-term specified asset" for making any investment under this section during the period commencing from the 1st day of April, 2006 and ending with the 31st day of March, 2007, means any bond, redeemable after three years and issued on or after

SANJAY GULABCHAND GUPTA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

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

long-term capital not being a residential house could claim benefit under the said Section provided, any one of the following three conditions were satisfied: (i) the assessee had within a period of one year before the sale, purchased a residential house. (ii) within two years after the date of transfer of the original capital asset; purchased a residential house

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

long term capital gain from the transaction in shares have been allowed on identical facts in earlier assessment years and that therefore the same could not be disallowed

M/S SHREE TRADERS ,BULDHANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

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

Long Term Capital Gain and Short Term Capital Gain. The AO asked the assessee why the claim of set off of business loss should not be disallowed

SHRI DEEPAK SURESH GADGE,,NAGPUR vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1 , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

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

long term capital gain has also been disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee being not satisfied with the order

DCIT-CC-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. INDRAKUMAR GHISULAL AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

long term capital gain (LTCG) of Rs.1,32,68,850/- and claimed the same as being exempt u/s 10(38) of Act in respect to sale of shares of M/s.GCM Securities Ltd. Assessee purchased 24000 shares of M/s.GCM Securities Ltd. for Rs.4,80,000/-. The shares have been sold at stock exchange through Registered Stock Broker. The total sale proceeds

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

long term capital gain from the transaction in shares have been allowed on identical facts in earlier assessment years and that therefore the same could not be disallowed

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

long term capital gain from the transaction in shares have been allowed on identical facts in earlier assessment years and that therefore the same could not be disallowed

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

long term capital gain from the transaction in shares have been allowed\non identical facts in earlier assessment years and that therefore the same\ncould not be disallowed

SHABBIR AHMED AHMED ALI,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESMENT CENTRY, DELHI

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

disallowance be modified considerably.” 3. The addition made by Assessing Officer is on account of long term capital gain arising

SIMA RAVISINGH KACHHAWAH,UMRER vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadalesima Ravisingh Kachhawah, Girad Road, Om Nagar Umrer, ……………. Appellant Nagpur- 441203 Maharastra, Pan – Aqmpk2899K V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(4), Nagpur Assessee By: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.Ar Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

Long-Term Capital Gain and the claimed deduction under Section 80C was disallowed on assumption basis. The additions confirmed are therefore

GEETADEVI BADRINARAYAN PANPALIYA,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

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

Long Term Capital Gain 2. Sale Deed Dated 16/01/2014 for ` 1,62,50,000 (To Dilip & Jagruti Doshi) 3. Sale Deed Dated 16/01/2014 for ` 81,25,000 (To Laxminarayan & Chanchal Sharma) 6. The learned Departmental Representative retorted that the details are bereft of any corroborative evidences and are neither reliable nor authentic. 4 Geetadevi Badrinarayan Panpaliya ITA no.477/Nag./2024

MAROTRAO LAXMAN KHADSE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.187/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Marotrao Laxman Khadse, The Income Tax Address: 4, Ward No.1, Vs Officer, Ward-3(4), Hdkeshwar, District: Nagpur. Nagpur. Maharashtra – 440034. Pan: Cropk0636B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe– Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 23/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2024 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)[Nfac],Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.04.2022 Emanating From The Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Act, 1961 Dated 16.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Marotrao Laxman Khadse [A]

Long Term Capital Gain. 2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case the Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in law on merit in disallowing