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

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account.” “Section 153C. Assessment of income of any other person- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sec139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the AO is satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs

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

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account.” “Section 153C. Assessment of income of any other person- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sec139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the AO is satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs

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

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account.” “Section 153C. Assessment of income of any other person- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sec139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the AO is satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

section 153A of the Act the Assessing Officer made various additions by examining the Profit & Loss Account, Tax Audit Report and assessed income was computed at ` 8,14,83,740. Claim u/s 24(a) from house property income (i) ` 1,36,709 disallowed Agricultural income has been treated as business (ii) ` 2,52,393 income Dividend income claimed exempt

SHRIRAM NARAYAN TIKDE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX, WARD 4(4) , NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

house property was completed on 31/07/2008 i.e within three years of sale deed of property sold dt. 06/11/2007. 6. That apart from incorrect appreciation of fact regarding period of construction, there is no other objection/s raised with regards to deduction u/s 54 by the learned AO during assessment proceedings and remand proceedings as well as by learned CIT(A) during

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

house property, income from business and income from other sources. The assessee has also shown income from exempt capital gains from transfer of equity shares.\nThe assessee has purchased 422500 shares of Swift IT Infrastructure and Services Ltd. by cheque on 16/03/2012 during the previous year relevant to Asstt. Year 2013-2014 and the same were shown in the balance

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

house property, income from business and income from other sources. The assessee has also shown income from exempt capital gains from transfer of equity shares. 7 Shri Nandkumar Khatumal Harchandani ITA no.410/Nag./2019 A.Y. 2014–15 The assessee has purchased 422500 shares of Swift IT Infrastructure and Services Ltd. by cheque on 16/03/2012 during the previous year relevant to Asstt

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

46,756/- as unexplained credit.\n8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made for disallowance of\ninterest paid amounting to Rs.22,06,391/.\n9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

46,756/- as unexplained credit.\n8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made for disallowance of\ninterest paid amounting to Rs.22,06,391/.\n9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

46,756/- as unexplained credit.\n8.\nOn the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made for disallowance of\ninterest paid amounting to Rs.22,06,391/.\n9.\nOn the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S THANJAVUR COMMERCE PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

46,756/- as unexplained credit.\n8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made for disallowance of\ninterest paid amounting to Rs.22,06,391/.\n9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

46,756/- as unexplained credit.\n8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made for disallowance of\ninterest paid amounting to Rs.22,06,391/.\n9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S MANSA AGRO FOOD PROCESSING PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

46,756/- as unexplained credit.\n8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made for disallowance of\ninterest paid amounting to Rs.22,06,391/.\n9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nlearned CIT(A) has erred

VIJAY VINOD DURAGKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

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

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

house property”, “income from business & profession” and “income from other sources”. The case was re–opened and notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was issued on 20/03/2020. The assessee, while 3 Vijaya Vinod Duragkar responding to the notice under section 148 of the Act, vide her letter dated 30/03/2021, submitted that she having already

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S GIGEO CONSTRUCTION CO.PVT. LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

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

10, which arose out of the impugned orders of even date 21/06/2016, and the assessee has also filed its appeal for the assessment year 2003–04, M/s. Gigeo Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. which arose out of the impugned order dated 28/12/2016. All these appeals have been passed by the learned CIT(A)–3, Nagpur. 2. For the assessment year

GIGEO CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3),, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

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

10, which arose out of the impugned orders of even date 21/06/2016, and the assessee has also filed its appeal for the assessment year 2003–04, M/s. Gigeo Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. which arose out of the impugned order dated 28/12/2016. All these appeals have been passed by the learned CIT(A)–3, Nagpur. 2. For the assessment year

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S GIGEO CONSTRUCTION CO.PVT. LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

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

10, which arose out of the impugned orders of even date 21/06/2016, and the assessee has also filed its appeal for the assessment year 2003–04, M/s. Gigeo Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. which arose out of the impugned order dated 28/12/2016. All these appeals have been passed by the learned CIT(A)–3, Nagpur. 2. For the assessment year

MANOJ KUMAR VISHANDAS KAMNANI ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL 2(2) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

property u/s 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961 for Rs 33,00,000/- is not justified, and bad in law and the same shall be deleted by your honour. 6.10 ……… 6.11 ……… 6.12 ……… 6.13 ……… 6.14 ……… 6.15 ……… 6.16. With respect to the addition made on account of Unaccounted Sale