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

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

income may be estimated at 8% as against 10% estimated by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee’s contention that the assessee is not defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, is unacceptable. Therefore, the assessee was treated as the defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, and all the transactions of M/s. Maria Constructions are treated

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

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

income may be estimated at 8% as against 10% estimated by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee’s contention that the assessee is not defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, is unacceptable. Therefore, the assessee was treated as the defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, and all the transactions of M/s. Maria Constructions are treated

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

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

income may be estimated at 8% as against 10% estimated by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee’s contention that the assessee is not defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, is unacceptable. Therefore, the assessee was treated as the defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, and all the transactions of M/s. Maria Constructions are treated

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

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

income may be estimated at 8% as against 10% estimated by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee’s contention that the assessee is not defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, is unacceptable. Therefore, the assessee was treated as the defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, and all the transactions of M/s. Maria Constructions are treated

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

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

income may be estimated at 8% as against 10% estimated by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee’s contention that the assessee is not defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, is unacceptable. Therefore, the assessee was treated as the defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, and all the transactions of M/s. Maria Constructions are treated

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

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

income may be estimated at 8% as against 10% estimated by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee’s contention that the assessee is not defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, is unacceptable. Therefore, the assessee was treated as the defacto owner of M/s. Maria Construction, and all the transactions of M/s. Maria Constructions are treated

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VINODKUMAR RAJENDRALAL KOCHHAR, KAMPTEE

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

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

business of export of forest produce. 2. The case was selected for limited scrutiny for verification of substantial increase in Capital in a year. 3. Proprietor's Capital as seen from the returns filed by the assessee, available on record, is as under: Sr.No. A.Y. Capital in Rupees 1 2015-16 Zero 2 2016-17 Rs.2,56,10,454 Further

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 being ITA no

business of trading and liasoning of coal and wind power. On 16/03/2011,\na search and seizure action was conducted in assessee's group cases namely\nM/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. The above mentioned assessee is one\nof the members of this group. The assessee, for the year under consideration,\nfiled its return of income under section

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 being ITA no

business of trading and liasoning of coal and wind power. On 16/03/2011,\na search and seizure action was conducted in assessee's group cases namely\nM/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. The above mentioned assessee is one\nof the members of this group. The assessee, for the year under consideration,\nfiled its return of income under section

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

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

business of trading and liasoning of coal and wind power. On 16/03/2011,\na search and seizure action was conducted in assessee's group cases namely\nM/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. The above mentioned assessee is one\nof the members of this group. The assessee, for the year under consideration,\nfiled its return of income under section

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

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

business of trading and liasoning of coal and wind power. On 16/03/2011, a search and seizure action was conducted in assessee’s group cases namely M/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. The above mentioned assessee is one of the members of this group. The assessee, for the year under consideration, filed its return of income under section

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

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

business of trading and liasoning of coal and wind power. On 16/03/2011, a search and seizure action was conducted in assessee’s group cases namely M/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. The above mentioned assessee is one of the members of this group. The assessee, for the year under consideration, filed its return of income under section

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

business income,\nwithout going into the merits of the case.\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 by the Assessing\nOfficer of Rs. 93,93,881/- on account of unexplained purchases, without\ngoing into the merits of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. AAKAR HOTELS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

business of hotel and restaurant. It was further\ndecided that the usage of the above said land by the partnership shall not in\nany manner or way will transfer any title or ancillary rights to the\npartnership firm and the title or ancillary right will also vest with partners in\ntheir individual capacity.\nB.\nOn the 2nd of November

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

business of trading and liasoning of coal and wind power. On 16/03/2011,\na search and seizure action was conducted in assessee's group cases namely\nM/s. Shree Agarwal Coal India Pvt. Ltd. The above mentioned assessee is one\nof the members of this group. The assessee, for the year under consideration,\nfiled its return of income under section

NEELAM JANARDHAN RACHALWAR,CHIMUR vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryneelam Janardhan Ito, Ward-2, Chandrapur Rachalwar, Sai Mandir Road, Tilak Ward, Chimur, Vs. Chandrapur, Maharashtra Pan: Adqpr 7539 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

busy with his studies due to JEE exams in January and April and Board exams in February/ March. As such, he did not paid attention to the email received. 6. That I came to know about the CIT(A) order only recently but due to frequent travelling for my son's education, I was not able to devote time

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

reassess the income of the third party in accordance with the procedure stipulated u/s153A. 78. In my considered view, there is a vital distinction between the object, intention as well as the express Judge of section 153A and 153C. Section 153A addresses the searched entity and the procedure set evidently a notch higher for this reason. There is no discretion

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

reassess the income of the third party in accordance with the procedure stipulated u/s153A. 78. In my considered view, there is a vital distinction between the object, intention as well as the express Judge of section 153A and 153C. Section 153A addresses the searched entity and the procedure set evidently a notch higher for this reason. There is no discretion

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

reassess the income of the third party in accordance with the procedure stipulated u/s153A. 78. In my considered view, there is a vital distinction between the object, intention as well as the express Judge of section 153A and 153C. Section 153A addresses the searched entity and the procedure set evidently a notch higher for this reason. There is no discretion