LOKSEWA SHIKSHAN BAHUUDDESHIYA MANDAL,BULDHANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.62/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Lokeswa Shikshan The Commissioner Of Bahuuddeshiya Mandal, V Income Tax-I, Nagpur. C/O. Dr.Arvindw.Kolte, S Janta College, Buldhana Road, Malkapur – 443101. Pan: Aaatl5306N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanjay Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Nagpur Dated 11.11.2014 Passed Under Section 12Aa(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : 1] On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Material Already On Record The Learned Cit Should Have Granted Registration U/S. 12A As Per Assessee’S Application Filed On Lokeswa Shikshan Bahuuddeshiya Mandal [A]

253(3) is reproduced here as under : (3) Every appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be filed within sixty days of the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the assessee or to the 73a[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner, as the case may be : 74[Provided that in respect

SHRIKANT BHERULAL SHARMA LATE BHERULAL GIRDHARILAL SHARMA,WASHIM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -3 , AKOLA

In the result, assessee’s appeal being ITA no

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

Section 143(1) or 143(3) assessment orders. For the relevant A.Y.2016-17, the Assessee filed his Income Tax Return on 30.07.2016 wherein the total income declared by the Assessee was Rs.2,75,350/- and agricultural income of the Assessee was Rs.70,000/-. 3] On 06.07.2017, the Assessee received a Notice u/s.143(2) by the A.O, Ward-3, Akola, for limited

SHRIKANT BHERULAL SHARMA LATE BHERULAL GIRDHARILAL SHARMA ,WASHIM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, AKOLA

In the result, assessee’s appeal being ITA no

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

Section 143(1) or 143(3) assessment orders. For the relevant A.Y.2016-17, the Assessee filed his Income Tax Return on 30.07.2016 wherein the total income declared by the Assessee was Rs.2,75,350/- and agricultural income of the Assessee was Rs.70,000/-. 3] On 06.07.2017, the Assessee received a Notice u/s.143(2) by the A.O, Ward-3, Akola, for limited

MAYUR KHARA,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

In the result, Both the appeals of above mentioned assessee’s are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Above Mentioned Assessees Against Two Different Orders Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Nagpur- 2 Dated 17-02-2017 & 16-02-20217 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Respectively. The Grounds Of Raised By The Above Mentioned Assessees Are As Under:-

section 253(5) of the Act, we hereby condone the delay in filing the present appeal as we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not 44 45 Shri Mayur Khara vs Pr. CIT-2, Nagpur presenting the appeal within the prescribed time and the appeal is hereby admitted for adjudication on merits. 4.1 Apropos grounds of appeal

CHANDRAKUMAR MADHUSUDANJI JAJODIA,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment is general in nature and is not on specific transaction of assessee. Evidence placed on record is not found to be incorrect or false. Conclusion of escapement of income tantamount to mere change of opinion. Belief of escapement of income could not be derived on the basis of report of Investigation Wing being not specific to transaction of loan

THE AMRAVATI PEOPLE CO-OP BANK LTD ( NOW MERGED IN THE COSMOS CO-OP BANK LTD),AMARAVATI vs. D.C.I.T. AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMARAVATI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

253/- to the total income of the assessee vide its order dated 18- 03-2014 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. Having aggrieved by the order of AO under reassessment, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A) vide its grounds of appeal in Form No. 35 which are at page

SUNRISE STRUCTURALS & ENGINEERING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roysunrise Structural & Acit/Dcit, Circle-4, Engineering P. Ltd., A10, Vs Nagpur Hingna Midc, Nagpur (Urban), Nagpur-440016 Pan : Aaccs 3220 M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 O R D E R

section 234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 9) Any other ground shall be prayed at the time of hearing.” 5. The assessee submitted the following submissions along with the paper book for consideration. 3.1 Ground No.1: Notice u/s 148 of I.T. Act 1961 is not in accordance with law:- A) Notice u/s 148A

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

3) has to be\nquashed, thus ordered accordingly. The Gr. raised by the Assessee is\naccordingly allowed”.\n14. In this appeal, we are required to examine whether any substantial que\nof law arises for our consideration.\n15. Having regard to the findings returned by the Trib, which are findings of\nfact, in our view, no substantial que of law arises

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

3) has to be\nquashed, thus ordered accordingly. The Gr. raised by the Assessee is\naccordingly allowed”.\n14. In this appeal, we are required to examine whether any substantial que\nof law arises for our consideration.\n15. Having regard to the findings returned by the Trib, which are findings of\nfact, in our view, no substantial que of law arises

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3).\n9.1. The respondent had declared an income amounting to Rs.87,20,580.\nHowever, while making the additions, strangely, the AO noted that the\nreturned income was Rs.11,00,460.\n49\nUmesh Sadashiv Thakre\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19,\n2019-20 & 2020-21\n10. There were 2 additions made by the AO. The first addition was made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3) has to be\nquashed, thus ordered accordingly. The Gr. raised by the Assessee is\naccordingly allowed”.\n14. In this appeal, we are required to examine whether any substantial que\nof law arises for our consideration.\n15. Having regard to the findings returned by the Trib, which are findings of\nfact, in our view, no substantial que of law arises

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3). A combined perusal of the approval sought by the AO, the\napproval given by the Addl.CIT and the copy of remand report of the AO\nshow that there is only some namesake approval given by the Addl.CIT on\nthe very same day on which the AO sought approval. The Addl.CIT without\nverifying the records has given approval

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3) rws.153A in the following case on the basis of draft\nassessment orders...” which clearly proves that the Addl.CIT had routinely\ngiven approval to the AO to pass the order only on the basis of contents\nmentioned in the draft assessment order without any application of mind\nand seized materials were not looked at and/ or other enquiry and\nexamination

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3 or 4 requirements that are mandated therein,\n(i) the AO should submit the draft assessment order \"well in time”. Here it\nwas submitted just 2 days prior to the deadline thereby putting the\napproving authority under great pressure and not giving him sufficient time\nto apply his mind;\n(ii) the final approval must be in writing

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

3) rws.153A in the following case on the basis of draft\nassessment orders...” which clearly proves that the Addl.CIT had routinely\ngiven approval to the AO to pass the order only on the basis of contents\nmentioned in the draft assessment order without any application of mind\nand seized materials were not looked at and/ or other enquiry and\nexamination

M/S. CONCRETE DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] the assessee challenges the respective appellate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-3, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing its appeals assailed against respective assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A/143(3) of the Act by the respondent for various assessment

M/S. CONCRETE DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTREAL CIRCEL-1(3), NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] the assessee challenges the respective appellate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-3, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing its appeals assailed against respective assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A/143(3) of the Act by the respondent for various assessment

M/S. CONCRETE DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] the assessee challenges the respective appellate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-3, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing its appeals assailed against respective assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A/143(3) of the Act by the respondent for various assessment