DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

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

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

40A(3), 43B, etc of the Act and other specific disallowances , related to the business activity against which the Chapter VI A Deductions has been claimed, result in enhancement of the profits of eligible business, and that deduction under Chapter VI A is admissible on the profits of the eligible business, and that deduction under chapter VI A is admissible

M/S PYRAMID DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. JOINT CIT RANGE 1, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

40A(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also made addition of penalty expenses of ` 1,19,230, rent of ` 1,98,450 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct TDS under section 194I of the Act, and also disallowed the amount of ` 2

ITO, WARD-1(5), NAGPUR vs. M/S. SHREE GANNAYAK BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Sh. G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh. Mahavir Singhvs Shree Gannayak Builders & Developers, Ito, Ward–1(5), Room No.502, Plot No.2, Near Global India International School, 5Th Floor, Mecl Bldg., Kalmana Basti, Nagpur–440008. Seminary Hills, Pan–Abrfs9402L Nagpur–440006. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R.K.Baral, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. Manoj Moryani, Adv. Date Of Hearing 07.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2018

disallowance required to be made under Section 40A(3). In our opinion, the direction of the CIT(A) is fully justified. We, 4 ITA - 3303 & 3304/D/2013 therefore, do not find any justification to interfere with the same. The order of learned CIT(A) is sustained.” 7. While going though the Tribunal’s order in the case of A.T. Properties P.Ltd

LOKMANYA TILAD JANAKALYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

2)refers to forfeiture of exemption for breach of section J 3(1) (d) resulting in levy of maximum marginal rate of tax only to that part of the income which has forfeited exemption. Where a trust contravenes section 13(1)(d), the maximum marginal rate of income-tax will apply only to that part of income which has forfeited

ASSTT. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. SMT. JOTI SURESH BAJORIA , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.151/Nag/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Smt. Jyoti Suresh Bajoria, Commissioner Of Income V 402/403, Jagat Plaza, Law Tax, Circle-1(1), S College Square, Amravati Nagpur. Road, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Abrpb2740G Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Kapil Sharma– Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash Kanojiya – Dr Date Of Hearing 28/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue I.E.Acit, Circle-1(1), Nagpur Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Dated 26.03.2018 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 153A Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Smt. Jyoti Suresh Bajoria [R]

disallowance under section 40A(3) as assessee has made certain purchases in cash in violation of section 40A(3). Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) in para 6.2.9 held as under : “6.2.9 I find that in case of the appellant a search and seizure 2

KHALID NADEEM ALLARAKHA,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

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

section 40A(3), therefore order passed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 2 Shri Karim Kamruddin Malik 3. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Nagpur erred in confirming the addition made at Rs. 1,53,976/- disallowing

ITO WARD-1(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. ASHWAMI SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

2. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that an extension for Sea. 194C(6) has been made in section 194C(7) which came into existence only from 01.04.2015, whereas no Ashwami Sales and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.294/Nag./2023 amendment in section 194C (7) was made by Finance

SHRI KISHORE SOMDATTA SHUKLA ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -3, AKOLA

Appeal is allowed in above terms

section 2 40A(3) disallowance regarding the assessee’s payment of Rs.19,43,850/- made to two country liquor retailers

ACIT,CIR-8,, NAGPUR vs. SHRI ROSHANLAL RAMDEO JAISWAL,, GONDIA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is ordered to be dismissed

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

disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, the Revenue has filed the present appeal before us. ISSUE NO.1 AND 2

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

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

2,81,33,000/- included in the Work-in-progress of Rs. 15,64,07,053/- shown in the P&L account. (iv) verification of disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of the Act." 11. We find that the issues on which re–assessment order was passed under section

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

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

2,81,33,000/- included in the Work-in-progress of Rs. 15,64,07,053/- shown in the P&L account. (iv) verification of disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of the Act." 11. We find that the issues on which re–assessment order was passed under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, WARDHA, WARDHA vs. PADMAKAR KRUSHNAJI WARBHE, HINGANGHAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowances\nunder section 40A(3) are justified for such payments.\n5. We have considered rival submissions of the parties and have gone through\nthe orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that the AO made the\naddition under section 40A(3) of Rs.10,16,03,090/-, being 20% of total\npayment of Rs.50.83 crores by taking into view that

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

2 4. These issues are inter-connected, therefore, are being taken up for adjudication. In fact, both the issues are in connection with the deletion of addition of ` 44,69,492 made by the Assessing Officer under section 40A(3) of the Act. Before going further, it would be 4 Shri Prakash Ramdeo Jaiswal necessary to advert the finding

ITO, WARD- 4 (1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SWAPNIL ANIL AHIRKAR, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

2) / 142(1) was issued and served upon the assessee. After verification of the facts of the case, the Assessing Officer disallowed the commission to the tune of ` 42,49,485 and also disallowed the amount of ` 24 lakh under section 40A

ASTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,AMRAVATI CIR.AMRAVATI, AMRAVATI vs. SHRI AKASH RAMESHWAR PANPALIA,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh. Mahavir Singhacit, Vs Akash Rameshwar Panpalia, Amravati Circle, Ward No.14, Dhamangaon Amravati, Aayakar Railway, Distt.-Amravati–4447–9. Bhawan, Ambapeth, Pan–Aiopp8687J Amravati–444601. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh.R.K.Baral, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh.K.P.Dewani, Adv. Date Of Hearing 08.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 08.03.2018

2. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is against the order of Ld.CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of expenses made by the Assessing Officer by applying the provision of section 40A

AJAZ AHMAD,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AKOLA

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

section 40A(3) of the Act. These six persons, besides being Cultivator are Agents of Cultivators, the assessee furnished affidavits of four persons confirming same facts. Affidavits of 2 persons were not available immediately, so the Assessing Officer disallowed

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

disallowed the amount of ` 3 lakh under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition

RAHUL UDYOG,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2, AMRAVATI

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

40A(2) and thereby disallowing Rs. 4,63,656/- inspite of the fact that interest rate is quite fair & reasonable with existing market rate and no contrary evidence is brought by Ld AO on record regarding excessive interest rate. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there has been a delay of 47 days in filing the present appeal

SHRI ANKIT SHANKARLAL TANWANI,CHHINDWARA vs. ASSISTANAT 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 Ankit Shankar Lal Tanwani Vs. The Acit Near Shankar Mandir, Shankar Central Circle 2(1) Nagar, Pandhuna Pandhurna Nagpur Chhindwara – 480 334 (M.P.) Pan No.:Biapt 4756 R 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 8Th 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 under section 40A(3) required to be made. Thereafter, AO did not allow deduction under section 80HHC. On appeal, CIT(A) deleted said addition. Tribunal deleted the addition made by AO solely on the basis of statement of 'CP', the ostensible proprietor of 'ST' and 'RC' keeping in view that no evidence was found in course of search proceedings