VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

ii) "scheduled bank" has the same meaning as in the Explanation at the end of clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 11, but does not include a co-operative bank;] The provision inserted for the first time clearly shows that the intention of the legislature was to assist the scheduled banks in making adequate provisions

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

ii) "scheduled bank" has the same meaning as in the Explanation at the end of clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 11, but does not include a co-operative bank;] The provision inserted for the first time clearly shows that the intention of the legislature was to assist the scheduled banks in making adequate provisions

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. SHRI KIRIT SHARAD JOSHI, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

4) of section 80IA. It was specifically mentioned that the Explanation was w.r.e.f. 01.04.2000. 8.2 In fact, there is no dispute on the fact that the amendment in the Finance Act, 2013 in Explanation 1 to section 10(10D) is effective from 01.04.2014 and has no retrospective effect. Reference is made to the Explanatory Notes to the amendment

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

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

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

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

10 The Nirmal Ujwal Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. A.Y.2014–15 “Any sum received by the assessee from any of his employee to which the provision of sub-clause(x) of clause (24) of section 2 apply, if such sum is credited by the assesse to the employee‟s account in the relevant fund or funds on or before

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section\n80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return\nof income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no\nspecific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for\nbelated returns or return

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. M/S. GONDWAN A ENGINEERS LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

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

10,23,01,541. The audit report in Form no.3CA, was already filed on 26/11/2014. However, in the return of income, no deduction under section 801A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was claimed. The assessee thereafter filed a revised return of income on 10/09/2015 and claimed deduction under section 801A

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

II Commissioner of Income Tax –Vs.- Deepak Mittal\nBusiness expenditure-Disallowance under s. 14A-Apportionment of expendi–ture-Disallowance under s. 14A required finding of incurring of expenditure-Where it is found that for earning exempted income no expenditure has been incurred, disallowance under s. 14A cannot stand-In view of finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that

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

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

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

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

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

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

AMA EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC,, BANGALORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

ii) amend section 43B of the Act by inserting Explanation 5 to the said section to clarify that the provisions of the said section do not apply and deemed to never have been applied to a sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which provisions of sub-clause (x) of clause (24) of section 2 applies