A.C.I.T ,AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA vs. M/S LEBEN LABORATORIES PVT..LTD,, AKOLA

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

disallowing assessee‟s claim of deduction u/s. 80IB. The assessee has also raised additional grounds of appeal challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s. 147

M/S. LEBEN LABORATORIES PVT. LTD.,,AKOLA vs. ACIT, AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA, AKOLA

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

disallowing assessee‟s claim of deduction u/s. 80IB. The assessee has also raised additional grounds of appeal challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s. 147

ASHOKKUMAR GOKULCHAND SANANDA,BULDHANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Royashokkumar Gokulchand Acit, Akola Circle, Akola Sananda, Rana Traders, Vs Gandhi Chowk, Khamgaon, Dist. Buldhan, Khamgaon Pan : Adpps 755I L Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

disallowance of Rs. 17,50,000/- u/s. 35(1)(ii) and addition of Rs. 1,50,000/- u/s. 69C of the Act. Based on the information received from ACIT, 3 Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai, a search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of M/s. Sri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban

NIRMALKUMAR AGRAWAL HUF,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHANDARA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

reassessment order dated 24.03.2023 passed by AO u/s 147 read with 5 Nirmalkumar Agrawal (HUF) ITA no.242/Nag./2025 section 144B of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19 in the case of the assessee is set aside, with a direction to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh Assessment Order denovo, after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee

PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTEM(HUF),NAGPUR vs. I.T.O.(TDS) WARD -1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

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

disallowed an amount of Rs.24,57,440/- u/s. 54B of the Act, wherein, he denied the deduction to the assessee by holding that the assessee being HUF is not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 54B of the Act vide order dated 26-03-2014. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before

SHRI PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTE (HUF), NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(4),, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

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

disallowed an amount of Rs.24,57,440/- u/s. 54B of the Act, wherein, he denied the deduction to the assessee by holding that the assessee being HUF is not entitled to claim deduction u/s. 54B of the Act vide order dated 26-03-2014. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 309/Nag/2015 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Amravati Peoples Co-Op. Bank Limited (Now Merged In The Cosmos Co-Op. Bank Ltd.) C/O. Cosmos Co-Op Bank Ltd. Jawahar Road, Amravati-444601. Pan : Aaact5899B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Amravati Circle, Amravati. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri S.G. Gandhi, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Agnes P. Thomas, Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.05.2022

disallowance of the brought forward losses was called for in its case, not finding favor with the same dismissed the appeal. 4. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 8 The Amravati Peoples Co-Op. Bank Limited Vs. DCIT 5. At the very outset the Ld. Authorized Representative

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

Reassessment proceedings unsustainable on ground of violation of procedure prescribed under section 148A(b). Reliance on : i) 150 taxmann.com 99 (Bom) Anurag Gupta vs. ITO (P- 135 – 139) (138) [Vol.- III] 3. Ground No.2 to 7: Addition Rs.6,77,58,435/- u/s 69C of I.T. Act 1961 is respect of purchases recorded in books of account. A) Regular books

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

147 of I.T. Act 1961 is bad in law in view of no notice u/s 143(2) of I.T. Act 1961 having been issued before framing assessment even though assessee has submitted return of income on 23/10/2018 in respect to notice u/s 148 of I.T. Act 1961. 4. The addition made by A.O. and upheld by CIT(A) at Rs.50

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S SUNFLAG IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos. 268 & 269/Nag/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Nagpur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. 33, Mount Road, Sadar, Nagpur-440 001 Pan : Aaccs3376C ……""यथ" / Respondent

147 its case could not have been reopened beyond a period of 4 years from the end of the assessment year. Accordingly, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act, dated 25.01.2017 was barred by limitation. Lastly, it was observed by the 6 DCIT, Circle-2 Vs. M/s. Sunflag Iron & Steel

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S SUNFLAG IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos. 268 & 269/Nag/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Nagpur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. 33, Mount Road, Sadar, Nagpur-440 001 Pan : Aaccs3376C ……""यथ" / Respondent

147 its case could not have been reopened beyond a period of 4 years from the end of the assessment year. Accordingly, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act, dated 25.01.2017 was barred by limitation. Lastly, it was observed by the 6 DCIT, Circle-2 Vs. M/s. Sunflag Iron & Steel

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDLAL B MALOO, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

147 are started the ITO has not only the jurisdiction but also the duty to complete the assessment denovo and what is true of assm is also rule of reassessment because reassessment is nothing but a fresh assessment. 8.1 As regards the issue whether the addition is justified it is necessary to recapitulate the facts of the case. The income

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

disallowed which was confirmed by the order of CIT(A), thereby, the AO added an amount of Rs.61,96,253/- 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

BAHUBALI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2019-20

reassessment order dated 01.01.2024 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act has made the additions of Rs.13,28,835/- on account of income from sale transactions of securities and Rs.75,000/- being disallowance

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

147 till 31/03/2021. 16 On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) failed to apply the definition of conclusiveness by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rajeev Yeshwant Bhale Vs PCIT W.P No.3366 of 2017 with C.A. No.849 of 2017. 17. On the facts and circumstances of the case

ASSISTANT 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

147 till 31/03/2021. 16 On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) failed to apply the definition of conclusiveness by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rajeev Yeshwant Bhale Vs PCIT W.P No.3366 of 2017 with C.A. No.849 of 2017. 17. On the facts and circumstances of the case

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

147 till 31/03/2021. 16 On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) failed to apply the definition of conclusiveness by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rajeev Yeshwant Bhale Vs PCIT W.P No.3366 of 2017 with C.A. No.849 of 2017. 17. On the facts and circumstances of the case

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

147 till 31/03/2021. 16 On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) failed to apply the definition of conclusiveness by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rajeev Yeshwant Bhale Vs PCIT W.P No.3366 of 2017 with C.A. No.849 of 2017. 17. On the facts and circumstances of the case