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

disallowance U/s. 14A applying Rule 8D-CIT(A) deleted addition-ITAT confirmed deletion-Held, despite notices by AO to give details of expenditure made on earning of exempted income in nature of dividend, version of assessee was that he had not made any expenditure on earning such income-AO as per Section 14A(2

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

disallowance U/s. 14A applying Rule 8D-CIT(A) deleted addition-ITAT confirmed deletion-Held, despite notices by AO to give details of expenditure made on earning of exempted income in nature of dividend, version of assessee was that he had not made any expenditure on earning such income-AO as per Section 14A(2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCEL-1(2, NAGPUR vs. M/S. VIBRANT GLOBAL CAPITAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

2), Mumbai, on 20/12/2016, determining total income at ` 8,65,21,840. In the assessment framed, addition has been made at ` 850 lakh under section 68 of the Act, apart from other additions out of claim of interest, disallowance under section 14A

SHRIRAM DADAJI MATTE,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

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

2 & 7, being general in nature, hence no separate adjudication is contemplated. 4. Ground no.3, relates to addition of ` 54,8937 (` 47,84,742 + ` 7,045) on account of interest on investment under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 5. The appellant is an individual having business in the name and style of “M/s. Matte Associates

SHRIRAM DADAJI MATTE,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

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

2 & 7, being general in nature, hence no separate adjudication is contemplated. 4. Ground no.3, relates to addition of ` 54,8937 (` 47,84,742 + ` 7,045) on account of interest on investment under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 5. The appellant is an individual having business in the name and style of “M/s. Matte Associates

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI & CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE, AMRAVATI vs. CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD., CHANDRAPUR

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

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

2,39,000/- u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the I.T. Rules without appreciating the fact that the provisions of section 14A with regard to dividend income were upheld by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT. 7. Any other ground that may be raise during the proceedings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE , CHANDRAPUR vs. M/S CHANDRAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPRATIVE BANK LIMTED , CHANDRAPUR

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

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

2,39,000/- u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the I.T. Rules without appreciating the fact that the provisions of section 14A with regard to dividend income were upheld by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT. 7. Any other ground that may be raise during the proceedings

ACIT, CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE , CHANDRAPUR vs. CHANDRAPUR DISTT. CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD , CHANDRAPUR

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

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

2,39,000/- u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the I.T. Rules without appreciating the fact that the provisions of section 14A with regard to dividend income were upheld by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT. 7. Any other ground that may be raise during the proceedings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S. FUELCO COAL INDIA LTD., NAGPUR

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowed Rs 11,30,384/- under section 14A of the Act. There is no adverse comment made by the AO in this scrutiny assessment order regarding the investments made by M/s Saphire Marketing Pvt Ltd in the shares of various companies. In fact, the sale of shares held as investment by M/s Saphire Marketing Pvt Ltd and its investment

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

In the result, Department's appeal stands dismissed

disallowed and required to be added back to the total\nincome of the assessee. As per section 10(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the\nagriculture income is the income which do not form part of total income and as\nper section 14A(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the purposes of computing the\ntotal income under this Chapter

ACIT, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI vs. CHANDRAPUR DIST CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

2 crore, which resulted into addition of ` 62.92 crore and the disallowance has been made from the documents submitted by the assessee along with the return of income. Consequent upon such addition, the Assessing Officer levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for ` 21.40 crore. The assessee being aggrieved with the penalty order, filed appeal before

M/S SHREE STEEL CQASTINGS PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrym/S. Shree Steel Castings Dcit, Circle-1, Nagpur Pvt. Ltd., T/38/1, Midc, Vs. Hingna Road, Nagpur. Pan: Aaccs 4071 J (Appellant) (Respondent)

2. In this case, the case of the Assessee was reopened u/sec. 147 of the Act by issuing notice dated 26/03/2013 u/sec. 148 of the Act mainly on the reason that Assessee had received share application money of Rs. 30 Lac from following three Mumbai based entities: (i) Umang Travel & Trade Link Pvt. Ltd. (ii) Sikha Finacne & Leasing