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, Section 148, Section 149, Section 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under Section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under Section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall- (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish

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, Section 148, Section 149, Section 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under Section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under Section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall- (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish

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, Section 148, Section 149, Section 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under Section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under Section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall- (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish

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, Section 148, Section 149, Section 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under Section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under Section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall- (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish

VAISHNAV YASHWANT ASHTANKAR,NAGPUR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - NAGPUR 2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

147 r.w.s. 144B for A.Y. 2016-17. 1. In addition, it is seen that the source of investment in the purchase of property i.e. Rs. 34,28,333/- (1/3rd of the purchase consideration of Rs. 1,02,85,000/-) had been claimed by the assessee during reassessment proceedings to be out of old savings and receipts on sale of Agricultural

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

147 of the Act. Further, he held that sub-section (2) of section 151 of the Act is applicable to the facts on hand as the original assessment u/s. 143(1) of the Act under intimation proceedings. Further, he reproduced observations of the assessee in assessment proceedings to show that the assessee inspected the assessment records and found satisfied

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

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 11.03.2022 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. ITA No. 137/NAG/20245 (Mamta Sanjay Dand) 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and did not file her return

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.2, NAGPUR vs. SHRI GOVINDDAS GOVERDHAN DAGA, NAGPUR

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

36,89,599/- made on account of sale consideration of shares. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,95,898/ only as against the addition of Rs. 86,47,052/ on account of expenses for selling the shares and in deleting

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

147 read with section 148, on basis of report from Investigation wing of department. Therefore, where assessing Officer had been supplied with information by Investigation wing and he applied his mind to such information, there was no infirmity or illegality in issuance of notice under section 148. 6.2.4 In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-7 vs. Paramount

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

147 read with section 148, on basis of report from Investigation wing of department. Therefore, where assessing Officer had been supplied with information by Investigation wing and he applied his mind to such information, there was no infirmity or illegality in issuance of notice under section 148. 6.2.4 In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-7 vs. Paramount

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

147 read with section 148, on basis of report from Investigation wing of department. Therefore, where assessing Officer had been supplied with information by Investigation wing and he applied his mind to such information, there was no infirmity or illegality in issuance of notice under section 148. 6.2.4 In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-7 vs. Paramount

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)

u/s 147 of the Act by recording the reasons for reopening and issuing notice dated 28/02/2019 u/sec. 148 of the Act. 9. The Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings, also observed that the Assessee vide agreement to sale dated 24/08/2015 had purchased land at Mouza Vadala Paiku Tal- Chimur, District Chandrapur for a consideration of Rs. 70.00 lakhs

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 is liable to be cancelled. 2 Chandrakumar Madhusudanji Jajodia ITA no.399/Nag./2023 3. Assessment framed u/s 144 r.w.s. 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

VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

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

36) [Vol.- I] iv) (2022) 145 taxmann.com 618 (Calcutta) PCIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. (P-19-24) (24) [Vol.-1] v) (2007) 295 ITR 0282 (SC) CIT vs. Max India Ltd (P-61-63)[Vol.-I] vi) (2023) 151 taxmann.com 493 (Surat-Trib.) BhikhabhaiRajabhaiDhameliya vs. PCIT (P-41-51) (41, 48, 51) [Vol.-I] vii) ITAT order in ITANo.74/Jab/2024

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

36,726/-. GROUND NO. 1 and 2: That the AO erred in passing the assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153A. The notice and proceedings u/s. 153A are bad in law and wrong on facts. That no incriminating document was found as a result of search and the notice u/s. 153A was objected in the computation of income furnished vide letter

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

36,726/-. GROUND NO. 1 and 2: That the AO erred in passing the assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 1534. The notice and proceedings u/s. 153A are bad in law and wrong on facts. That no incriminating document was found as a result of si arch and the notice u/s. 153A was objected in the computation of income furnished vide

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

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