DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. M/S SAS DEVELOPERS & ENGINEERS `, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by department is dismissed

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

House Property” shall be computed after making the following deductions namely – (a) a sum equal to thirty percent of the annual value; (b) where the property had been acquired, constructed, repaired, renewed or reconstructed with borrowed capital, the amount of any interest payable on such on capital.” 4.16 As per the above provision, the assessee had rightly claimed the interest

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

property as per registered sale deed is residential house under construction with built–up area of 158.55 sq.mtrs. on the piece of plot measuring 19,200 sq.mtrs. in survey no.11/1, Mauja Navsari, District Amravati. The land is consistently used for agricultural purpose. It is beyond the scope of wildest imagination that usage of land is ambulatory even when character

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

house property. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 2. Before us, during the course of hearing, while going through the material available on record filed by the learned Authorised Representatives appearing for the assessee, it is evident that the assessee company had gone under insolvency proceeding under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code

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

house property. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 2. Before us, during the course of hearing, while going through the material available on record filed by the learned Authorised Representatives appearing for the assessee, it is evident that the assessee company had gone under insolvency proceeding under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code

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

house property. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 2. Before us, during the course of hearing, while going through the material available on record filed by the learned Authorised Representatives appearing for the assessee, it is evident that the assessee company had gone under insolvency proceeding under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code

VAISHALI ARVIND TAYADE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, AMARAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

section 80C (LIC/PPF) was disallowed. The Assessing Officer has also disallowed the interest paid on borrowed capital amounting to ` 3 Vaishali Arvind Tayade ITA no.374/Nag./2022 78,540, aggregating to the total disallowance of ` 1,22,310. Consequent upon passing of the assessment order by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 5. The learned

SHRI DEEPAK SURESH GADGE,,NAGPUR vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1 , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

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

houses thereon. The said land has been purchased by the firm, through the assessee as partner, vide purchase deed dated 05/09/2008, and correction deed dated 02/07/2009 for ` 22,50,000. According to the Assessing Officer, this land has been taken by the assessee into stock for previous year in his books of accounts. Since the assessee is engaged

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

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

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

200 income 2006–07 Unexplained ` 12,70,000 Investment Unexplained ` 3,00,000 receipt ` 37,31,700 Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain A.Y. 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 & 2008–09 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 15,85,682 Commission 36,380 income Income from ticket 4,51,860 booking

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

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

200 income 2006–07 Unexplained ` 12,70,000 Investment Unexplained ` 3,00,000 receipt ` 37,31,700 Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain A.Y. 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 & 2008–09 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 15,85,682 Commission 36,380 income Income from ticket 4,51,860 booking

MISS FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

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

200 income 2006–07 Unexplained ` 12,70,000 Investment Unexplained ` 3,00,000 receipt ` 37,31,700 Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain A.Y. 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 & 2008–09 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 15,85,682 Commission 36,380 income Income from ticket 4,51,860 booking

MISS FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

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

200 income 2006–07 Unexplained ` 12,70,000 Investment Unexplained ` 3,00,000 receipt ` 37,31,700 Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain A.Y. 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 & 2008–09 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 15,85,682 Commission 36,380 income Income from ticket 4,51,860 booking

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

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

200 income 2006–07 Unexplained ` 12,70,000 Investment Unexplained ` 3,00,000 receipt ` 37,31,700 Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain A.Y. 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 & 2008–09 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 15,85,682 Commission 36,380 income Income from ticket 4,51,860 booking

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

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

200 income 2006–07 Unexplained ` 12,70,000 Investment Unexplained ` 3,00,000 receipt ` 37,31,700 Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain A.Y. 2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08 & 2008–09 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 15,85,682 Commission 36,380 income Income from ticket 4,51,860 booking

M/S. HARIHAR INFRASTUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE- 1,, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 60/Nag/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Harihar Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.; G-3, Amar Palace, Opp. Patwardhan Ground, Dhantoli, Nagpur-12. Pan : Aabch9888H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Shriram, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Headoo, Dr

section 234A, 234B & 234C of I T Act, 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 11. The assessee craves leave to add/alter any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee company which is engaged in the business of developing housing projects had filed its return of income 4 M/s. Harihar Infrastructure Development Corporation

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , AKOLA

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

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

property of the tax payer, however, same can be easily fetched by the department by issue of summons. j) Copy of documentary evidences to substantiate genuineness of the lenders:- The fact that the transaction was indeed in a realm of a loan, is apparent from the fact that almost all the loans borrowed from the third parties were repaid