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

201 PAN – AAATJ1449G Assessee by : Shri Mahavir Atal Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 28/01/2025 Date of Order – 03/04/2025 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the impugned orders of even date 11/08/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [―learned

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

201 PAN – AAATJ1449G Assessee by : Shri Mahavir Atal Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 28/01/2025 Date of Order – 03/04/2025 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the impugned orders of even date 11/08/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [―learned

M/S INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

section 201(3) the Financial Act, 2012. 3. The non–deduction TDS and interest thereon u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) on share application money of Rs.55,89,527/- amounting to Rs.22,45,596/- is incorrect, illegal, bad in law and without natural justice and the same is to be deleted. 4. That the levy of TDS on advance Share

INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

section 201(3) the Financial Act, 2012. 3. The non–deduction TDS and interest thereon u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) on share application money of Rs.55,89,527/- amounting to Rs.22,45,596/- is incorrect, illegal, bad in law and without natural justice and the same is to be deleted. 4. That the levy of TDS on advance Share

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

section 10A the addition made on account of the disallowance of the provident fund/ESIC payments ought to be ignored cannot be accepted. No statutory provision to that effect having been made, the plain consequence of the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer must follow. The second question shall accordingly stand answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee

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

section should be allowed if the appellant had made any provision towards bad and doubtful debts and not necessarily equivalent to the provision made as held by Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in case of Pratima Bank (58 ITR (Trib) 1). 2.2 Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) should have allowed the alternate claim of the appellant that

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

section should be allowed if the appellant had made any provision towards bad and doubtful debts and not necessarily equivalent to the provision made as held by Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in case of Pratima Bank (58 ITR (Trib) 1). 2.2 Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) should have allowed the alternate claim of the appellant that

M/S TAWARI TRADERS ,BULDHANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2, KHAMGAON

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

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

201 categorically states that the aforesaid Sections would be without prejudice to any other consequences which that defaulter may incur. Other consequences are provided under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, namely, payments made by such a person to a contractor shall not be treated as deductible expenditure. When read in this context, it is clear that Section

AHSAAN QURESHI,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

Section 201(1) of Income Tax Act 1961, by Finance Act 2012 is not retrospective and 2 Ahsaan Qureshi ITA no.323/Nag./2023 consequently Commission paid to Shri Ashfaque Khan Rs.100000/= without deducting TDS is disallowed by not following various judgments Hon High Court and Hon. ITAT that above amendments is curative in nature and intended to remove an undue hardship

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

Section 43B or anything contained in that provision would not absolve the assessee from its liability to deposit the employee’s contribution on or before the due date as a condition for deduction. 55. In the light of the above reasoning, this court is of the opinion that there is no infirmity in the approach of the impugned judgment

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

Section 43B or anything contained in that provision would not absolve the assessee from its liability to deposit the employee’s contribution on or before the due date as a condition for deduction. 55. In the light of the above reasoning, this court is of the opinion that there is no infirmity in the approach of the impugned judgment

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

3. Assessee's 2nd letter to Developer regarding remaining incomplete work dated 01/07/2015 4. Assurance letter from Developer dated 20/08/2015 5. Completion letter dated 01/09/2015 Assessing Officer without appreciating the fact that the said units were not ready for the purpose of residence as no following amenities were provided by the Developer at the time of sale deed, disallowed

M/S AHUJA BULKS MOVERS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCAL-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 180/Nag/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Ahuja Bulk Movers Pvt. Ltd. B-307, Lokmat Building, Wardha Road, Nagpur-440 012 Pan : Aabca5014E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.K Ganeriwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022

201(1) of the Act, therefore, we concur with the claim of the Ld. AR that as per the “2nd proviso” to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the aforementioned amount could not have been disallowed in the hands of the assessee company. Backed by our aforesaid deliberations, we, herein, set-aside the order of the CIT(Appeals

GOPAL DENESHCHANDRA TULSHAN ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AKOLA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

disallowance of interest expenses at Rs. 1,86,667/-, since the appellant has complied with the second proviso of section 40(a)(ia) rws first proviso of sub section (1) of section 201. It is pertinent to note here that, if there are conflicting decisions of various High Courts and there is also decision of Jurisdictional High Court

SHRI SHANKARLAL CHANDUMAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Shankarlal Chandumal Tanwani Vs. The Acit 41, Prop. Shankar Kirana, Tar Bazar, Central Circle 2(1) Main Road,Pandhurna 480334 (M.P.) Nagpur Pan No.:Aiqpt 1252 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv. & Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 8 / 6 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 7Th October 2021, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [In Short “The Learned Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal On The Following Grounds:- 2. “1. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur Erred In Confirming Addition, Therefore Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law.

disallowance of unsubstantiated sundry creditors. Impugned order was liable to be set aside 17 Shankarlal Chandumal Tanwani vs ACIT, CC-2(1, Nagpur Appeal of department allowed. The finding of the said case is quite distinguishable from the Appellant’s case as in the caselaw the additions were made on the basis of discrepancy found in the details submitted

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

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

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

3). The Assessing Officer has not made out a case of completeness or correctness of books of accounts. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has erred in rejecting books of accounts. Moreover, it is not the case were the appellant society has not paid due taxes. The appellant has paid due taxes in the succeeding years when sale deeds were executed. Therefore

M/S. ICON DRUGS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. CPC, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD3(4), NAGPUR

201, Saidarshan Complex, ITO, Ward- 3(4), Nagpur. Wardha Road, Vivekanand Nagar, Nagpur- 440015. PAN : AABCI1210L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri R. K. Ganeriwala Revenue by Shri G. J. Ninawe : Date of hearing : 02.11.2022 Date of pronouncement : 27.12.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JM: These assessee’s twin appeals for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 arise

M/S. ICON DRUGS PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. CPC , INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), NAGPUR

201, Saidarshan Complex, ITO, Ward- 3(4), Nagpur. Wardha Road, Vivekanand Nagar, Nagpur- 440015. PAN : AABCI1210L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri R. K. Ganeriwala Revenue by Shri G. J. Ninawe : Date of hearing : 02.11.2022 Date of pronouncement : 27.12.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JM: These assessee’s twin appeals for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 arise

NIMSHASKIYA MADHYANIK SHALEY KARAMCHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD.,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

201 PAN–AABAN8383R v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–2, Wardha Assessee by : Shri Abhishek Kumar Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 04/09/2024 Date of Order – 09/09/2024 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 08/03/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner