ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA RADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, In respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, In respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, In respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. M/S. RADHA MADHAV DEVELOPER, NAGPUR

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, In respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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 framed on 19/12/2018, has made addition of ` 50 lakh under section 68 of the Act by not accepting the credit in the name of M/s. Abhilasha Shoppers Pvt. Ltd., and interest paid on such loan at ` 1,99,520. The assessee being aggrieved carried the matter before the first appellate authority. 4. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee

GANESH MAHADEORAO THAWARE,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD 5(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

section 69A of the Act, which was added to the total income of the assessee. 5. On appeal, the assessee challenged the re–opening of assessment before the learned CIT(A) amongst other grounds as well. However, the learned CIT(A) set aside the assessment for fresh adjudication to the file of the Assessing Officer without deciding the issue

BHAWANA HARIRAM LAVHALE,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2013–14 is allowed for statistical purposes

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

69A of the Act which was added to the total income of the assessee. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by concluding that the condonation of delay is not allowed as the assessee has a lackadaisical approach and in a nonchalant manner the assessee is attempting to seek condonation of delay and, hence

BHAWANA HARIRAM LAVHALE,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2013–14 is allowed for statistical purposes

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

69A of the Act which was added to the total income of the assessee. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by concluding that the condonation of delay is not allowed as the assessee has a lackadaisical approach and in a nonchalant manner the assessee is attempting to seek condonation of delay and, hence

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

reassessment proceeding against the Assessee for the A.Y.2016- 17. 7] In pursuance of proceedings taken up by A.O. after passing of an order u/s.263, he called upon the Assessee to prove the source of frequent deposits in Akola Janta Commerical Cooperative Bank during the year. Assessee filed online reply on 13.09.2021 and further reply Shrikant Bherulal Sharma L/H of Late

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

reassessment proceeding against the Assessee for the A.Y.2016- 17. 7] In pursuance of proceedings taken up by A.O. after passing of an order u/s.263, he called upon the Assessee to prove the source of frequent deposits in Akola Janta Commerical Cooperative Bank during the year. Assessee filed online reply on 13.09.2021 and further reply Shrikant Bherulal Sharma L/H of Late

SUMIT PRAKASHRAO FULZELE,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2 , CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

69A was confirmed in the absence of documentary proof that deposits is from business/ trading in clothes. 8. Sanjay Kapur Vs ACIT [2022] 138 taxmann.com 207 (SC) wherein it was held that High Court upheld reassessment in case where assessee had made a deposit of cash in bank during demonetization period, which was reflected in his return of income

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

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

reassessment is bad in law and the addition made in the assessment order is illegal as no incriminating document or unaccounted income was found during the course of search in the case of assessee. We would be submitting further while discussing the individual unds for addition made in the Assessment order. GROUND NO. 2; That the learned AO erred

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

reassessment is bad in law and the addition made in the assessment order is illegal as no incriminating document or unaccounted income was found during the course of search in the case of assessee. We would be submitting further while discussing the individual unds for addition made in the Assessment order. GROUND NO. 2; That the learned AO erred

MAMTA SANJAY DAND,BULDHANA vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KHAMGAON, BULDHANA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roymamta Sanjay Dand, Ito, Ward – 1, Khamgaon Akdo Jain Society, Vs Near Govind Nagar, At Post Malkhapur, Dist. Buldhana, Maharashtra-443101 Pan : Azgpd 6958 F Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanjeev Mutha, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.04.2026

reassessment was already completed u/s 147. Reopening done beyond 4 years is invalid. Approval u/s. 151 was granted mechanically without application of mind, as evident from reasons recorded. He further submitted that invocation of Explanation 2(a) to section 147 instead of clause (c) is incorrect. Reopening is merely on change of opinion and for verification of bank transactions, amounts

ABID MUSTAFA KHAN,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleabid Mustafa Khan, 301, Mayfair Residency, Raj Nagar Opp. Green Park, Nagpur 440 013, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Aqipk9595G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(2), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

section 151, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The said procedural lapse vitiates the entire reassessment proceedings and renders the notice and consequential order bad in law and void ab initio." 05. Learned AO erred in making addition u/s. 69A

ABDUL ASIF ABDUL KADIR ABDUL,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WARD-1,AKOLA, 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

reassessment framed is liable to be cancelled. 5. The addition made by A.O. and upheld by CIT(A) at Rs.1,72,06,081/- u/s 69A and tax levied u/s 115BBE of I.T. Act 1961 is unjustified, unsustainable and unwarranted. 6. The addition made by A.O. and upheld by CIT(A) at Rs.172.06 lacs being deposits in bank account without considering

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

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

reassessment is bad in law and the addition made in the assessment order is illegal as no incriminating document or unaccounted income was found during the course of search in the case of assessee. We would be submitting further while discussing the individual unds for addition made in the Assessment order. GROUND NO. 2; That the learned AO erred

VIKRAM AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

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

reassessment proceedings." 6.2.5 I have perused the matter and it is seen from the assessment order that the proper procedure was followed and no infirmity in law. The Assessing Officer should have reason to believe that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment and this belief should be of an honest and reasonable person based on reasonable grounds. Taking