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

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

133A(2A) was conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 10th October 2014 and during the course of survey, it was found that 6 Ultratech Cement Ltd. no TDS had been deducted on freight payment made in respect of transportation charges. It was explained by the assessee that as per the provisions of section 194C

DCIT-CC-1(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS(EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGRAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

133A of IT act was conducted at premises of the assessee on 25.08.2021. Assessee filed return of income on 13.02.2022 declaring total income of Rs. 18,01,81,210/-. Case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued which were duly replied by the assessee. In the assessment order passed

M/S. BELLEZZA (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Nag/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S.Bellazza (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit, Circle-2, Lg-3, Achraj Tower-Ii, Vs Nagpur. Chhaoni Chowk, Chhindwara Road, Nagpur – 13. Pan: Aaccb 4029 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri S.C.Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe - Dr Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2023 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)-1, Nagpur Dated 05.11.2014 Emanating From The Order Of Acit(Ao) Dated 30.12.2011 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act,1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1] A.C.I.T. Erred In Rejecting The Audited Books Of Account & Estimated Income @ 5% Of Total Receipts & Also Adding Additional Income Of Rs.30 Lacs To The Returned Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) Has Confirm The Addition Without Any Basis. 2] Learned C.I.T.(A) & A.C.I.T. Erred In Not Accepting The Assessee’S Various Submission & Supporting Documents Filed By The

section 133A of the Act at various premises of the assessee company during the F.Y. 2008-09 on 25/02/2009. During assessment proceedings , the Assessing Officer(AO) has rejected the books of accounts of the assessee and estimated the net profit at 5% and accordingly determined the total income at Rs.85,30,209/- as under: i) Estimated net profit : Rs.55

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

section 143(3) r/w 153A of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the impounded Excel Sheet contains the name of assessee and the assessee was unable to prove on the basis of any confirmation that the turnover belongs to any party. The assessee did not claim that the transactions mentioned in the Excel Sheet are fictitious or rough

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. RADHIKA METALS AND MINERALS, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was conducted in Radhika Group of cases on 13/04/2023. Subsequently, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued in response to which the assessee filed its return of income on 30/04/2023, and declaring total income of ₹ 3,11,36,784. The case was selected for scrutiny and ultimate the assessment

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

section 143(3) r/w 153A of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the impounded Excel Sheet contains the name of assessee and the assessee was unable to prove on the basis of any confirmation that the turnover belongs to any party. The assessee did not claim that the transactions mentioned in the Excel Sheet are fictitious or rough

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS (EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

133A of IT act was conducted at premises of the assessee on 25.08.2021. Assessee filed return of income on 13.02.2022 declaring total income of Rs. 18,01,81,210/-. Case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued which were duly replied by the assessee. In the assessment order passed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENT CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR vs. RADHIKA METALS AND MINERALS, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

133A of the Act was conducted in the case of assessee on 25/08/2021. Subsequently, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued in response to which the assessee filed its return of income on 17/01/2023, declaring total income of ` 6,21,51,433. The case was selected for scrutiny and ultimate the assessment order was passed under section

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS (EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGARAM

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

133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the assessee no 25/08/2021. The case was selected for scrutiny under section 147 of the Act and statutory notices under section 148 of the Act was issued in response to which the assessee filed return of income on 11/04/2023, declaring total income at ₹ 13,19,49,823. The case

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

section 143(3) r/w 153A of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the impounded Excel Sheet contains the name of assessee and the assessee was unable to prove on the basis of any confirmation that the turnover belongs to any party. The assessee did not claim that the transactions mentioned in the Excel Sheet are fictitious or rough

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

section 143(3) r/w 153A of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the impounded Excel Sheet contains the name of assessee and the assessee was unable to prove on the basis of any confirmation that the turnover belongs to any party. The assessee did not claim that the transactions mentioned in the Excel Sheet are fictitious or rough

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

section 143(3) r/w 153A of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the impounded Excel Sheet contains the name of assessee and the assessee was unable to prove on the basis of any confirmation that the turnover belongs to any party. The assessee did not claim that the transactions mentioned in the Excel Sheet are fictitious or rough

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

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

section 143(3) r/w 153A of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the impounded Excel Sheet contains the name of assessee and the assessee was unable to prove on the basis of any confirmation that the turnover belongs to any party. The assessee did not claim that the transactions mentioned in the Excel Sheet are fictitious or rough

ASSTT.CIT,CIR-8, NAGPUR vs. PRAKASH RAMDEO JAISWAL, GONDIA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

133A of the Act was conducted on this group on 14th December 2007 and 15th December 2007. During the survey, cash of ` 1,59,785 was found at Jai Bamleshwari Rice Mill which represented the joint cash of four concerns. Stock-in-trade and books of account were inventorized, however, subsequently, the same were released with the assessee. The assessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 143(3) was passed on 25/12/2018 wherein AO made following additions and computed the total income at Rs.4,81,11,724/-. Belated payment of EPF/ESIC Rs. 18,60,893/- Other Disallowance out of expenses Rs. 2,06,471/- Addition of belated payment of EPF/ESIC was disputed by assessee in appeal and the Hon'ble CIT Appeal, NFAC, Delhi vide

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. UNIQUE REALITIES BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS , NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for A

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

133A of Act was conducted in the business premises of M/s Saptigiri Developers, 12, 3rd Floor, N.K.Y. Towers, Ajni Square, Nagpur. At the time of survey, a hard disk was found and seized from the business premises of M/s Saptigiri Developers. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the contents of the said Hard Disk represents amount received