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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act 1961. 6.2 The appellant has relied on several judicial decisions to argue its case and these were perused. It is observed that the Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench, Bangalore in case of Syndicate Bank Vs. DCIT reported at 78 ITD 103 has concluded that the deduction u/s 36(1) (viia

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act 1961. 6.2 The appellant has relied on several judicial decisions to argue its case and these were perused. It is observed that the Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench, Bangalore in case of Syndicate Bank Vs. DCIT reported at 78 ITD 103 has concluded that the deduction u/s 36(1) (viia

SHRI PRAKASH JIWANDAS WANJARI,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, we are of the considered view that the case on hand does not warrant levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Act

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

271-1. section 271J, clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 2724, sub-section (1) of section 272AA or section 272B or sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) of section 272BB or sub-section (1) of section 272BBB or clause (b) of sub- section (1) or clause (b) or clause

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.56/Nag/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2018-19 Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., The Director Of Income C-108, Hingna Road, Midc V Tax, Industrial Area, Hingna, S Intelligence & Criminal Investigation, 3Rd Floor, Nagpur – 440028. Pan: Aaacb5340H Room No.301, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440001. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajesh Loya – Ca-Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Passed U/S250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Emanating From The Penalty Order Under Section 271Fa Of The Act Dated 27.09.2019 Passed By Director Of Income Tax(Intelligence & Bajaj Steel Industries Ltd., [A]

section 2 69 ST of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable to the assessee. That the assessee company has filed the SFT re porting only for safer side of law. Since this was the first year of filing and due to some wrong interpretation of law, the assessee has report the transactions/receipts which was not required

SHRI SANJAY RAMESHCHANDRAJI HEDA,AMARAVATI vs. ASSISTNT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

Penalty name appealed Proceedings amount against confirmed in the CIT(A)’S order ITA No. 112/ 2007- Shri Mitesh CIT(A)-3/69 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.1,69,783/- Nag./2018 08 G.Bhangdiya /2017-18 ITA No. 113/ 2007- Shri Sanjay CIT(A)-3/32 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.12,56,366/- Nag./2018 08 Heda /2017-18

SHRI MITESH G. BHANGDIYA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

Penalty name appealed Proceedings amount against confirmed in the CIT(A)’S order ITA No. 112/ 2007- Shri Mitesh CIT(A)-3/69 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.1,69,783/- Nag./2018 08 G.Bhangdiya /2017-18 ITA No. 113/ 2007- Shri Sanjay CIT(A)-3/32 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.12,56,366/- Nag./2018 08 Heda /2017-18

SHRI KIRTIKUMAR MITESH BHANGADIA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

Penalty name appealed Proceedings amount against confirmed in the CIT(A)’S order ITA No. 112/ 2007- Shri Mitesh CIT(A)-3/69 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.1,69,783/- Nag./2018 08 G.Bhangdiya /2017-18 ITA No. 113/ 2007- Shri Sanjay CIT(A)-3/32 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.12,56,366/- Nag./2018 08 Heda /2017-18

SHRI KIRTIKUMR BHANGDIYA ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT CMMISISONR OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

Penalty name appealed Proceedings amount against confirmed in the CIT(A)’S order ITA No. 112/ 2007- Shri Mitesh CIT(A)-3/69 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.1,69,783/- Nag./2018 08 G.Bhangdiya /2017-18 ITA No. 113/ 2007- Shri Sanjay CIT(A)-3/32 u/s. 271(1)(c) Rs.12,56,366/- Nag./2018 08 Heda /2017-18

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

271(1)(c) Tribunal deleted the impugned addition as well as the penalty imposed on the grounds that (i) assessee have given the names and addresses of the creditors, (ii) it had also produced before ITO letters of confirmation, the discharged hundis and particulars of the different creditors including their general index numbers with the Income-tax Department

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

271(1)(c)\nTribunal deleted the impugned addition as well as the penalty imposed on the\ngrounds that (i) assessee have given the names and addresses of the creditors,\n(ii) it had also produced before ITO letters of confirmation, the discharged\nhundis and particulars of the different creditors including their general index\nnumbers with the Income-tax Department

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

271(1)(c)\nTribunal deleted the impugned addition as well as the penalty imposed on the\ngrounds that (i) assessee have given the names and addresses of the creditors,\n(ii) it had also produced before ITO letters of confirmation, the discharged\nhundis and particulars of the different creditors including their general index\nnumbers with the Income-tax Department

MAITHILI MILIND RANE,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

69 of the IT Act, 1961.\n6) Assessee lodged complaint with EOW about recovery of money from\nMr. Wasankar and in complaint she claimed money maturity from Mr.\nWasankar in FY. 2012-13 as promised by him.\n7) The amount added to the income Rs. 17,00,000/- was not the amount\ninvested with Mr. Wasakar during

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

271(1)(c)\nTribunal deleted the impugned addition as well as the penalty imposed on the\ngrounds that (i) assessee have given the names and addresses of the creditors,\n(ii) it had also produced before ITO letters of confirmation, the discharged\nhundis and particulars of the different creditors including their general index\nnumbers with the Income-tax Department

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

271(1)(c)\nTribunal deleted the impugned addition as well as the penalty imposed on the\ngrounds that (i) assessee have given the names and addresses of the creditors,\n(ii) it had also produced before ITO letters of confirmation, the discharged\nhundis and particulars of the different creditors including their general index\nnumbers with the Income-tax Department

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

271(1)(c)\nTribunal deleted the impugned addition as well as the penalty imposed on the\ngrounds that (i) assessee have given the names and addresses of the creditors,\n(ii) it had also produced before ITO letters of confirmation, the discharged\nhundis and particulars of the different creditors including their general index\nnumbers with the Income-tax Department

SHRI SANJAY DHANRAJ JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee' appeal for A

section 68 of the Income Tax Act,\n1961. Further, the AO did not find the explanation offered by the assessee\nsatisfactory and stated that the assessee has failed to discharge its onus\ntowards explaining the credit of Rs.15,00,000/-. We respectfully object to the\nabove observations and allegations made by the AO as the same are based on\nconjectures

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

Penalty proceedings under section 27(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are hereby initiated.” 4. The appellant filed an appeal before the CIT (A), who has held as follows: “The AO in the assessment order held that on perusal of the return of income, it is seen that

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year