ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

Section 55(2)(ac) provides quoted rate of shares as cost of acquisition as on 31/01/2018 in certain cases to determine capital gain. H) Recent decision dated 15/01/2021 of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Krishna Devi in ITA No.125/2020 fully supports the case of assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. METROCITY HOMES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

130 to 132 The addition to total income of Rs. 26,00,000/- has been made on account of document found and impounded from the business premises of M/s Tirupati Developers framed as unexplained money u/s 69A as per Para 10 of Assessment order. The transactions are duly accounted in the books of Tirupati Developers through the capital account

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. VISHNU GILTS PVT.LT, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

130 taxmann.com 341, (Mum. Trib.). We find that decision in the aforementioned case was given in peculiar facts of the case which are distinguishable from facts in the case of assessee. In the said decision, the addition was made under section 68

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, NAGPUR vs. M/S RAGHAV FINVEST PVT LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

130 taxmann.com 341, (Mum. Trib.). We find that decision in the aforementioned case was given in peculiar facts of the case which are distinguishable from facts in the case of assessee. In the said decision, the addition was made under section 68

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. M/S NIHAL GITS PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

130 taxmann.com 341, (Mum. Trib.). We find that decision in the aforementioned case was given in peculiar facts of the case which are distinguishable from facts in the case of assessee. In the said decision, the addition was made under section 68

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S. METROCITY HOMES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

130 Taxman 553 (cal.).\nIn the instant case, there has been no money, bullion found during the search and survey action. Neither jewellery or valuable items found from possession of the assessee, nor it is found the assessee is the owner of any kind of money, bullion, jewellery etc. The limbs of Sec 69A are not getting satisfied

DAYAL COTSPIN LIMITED,AKOLA vs. ACIT, AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

130 ITR 0001 (SC) Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO” (P- 32 – 41) [Vol. – II] 9 Dayal Cotspin Ltd. 7. In grounds no.5 to 8, assessee has challenged the addition of ` 180 lakh under section 68

RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

section 68. Similarly, there is no basis or evidence on record for making addition of unexplained commission on expenditure. The addition of unexplained commission payment is solely based on assumption by AO. The ld. AR submits that assessee has no role in alleged manipulation of scrip of Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. or Premier Capital Services Ltd. In the order

LATE BHIMANDAS LAHORIMAL KHATRI,AMRAVATI vs. I.T.O. WARD - 3, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

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

68,41,130 849433 53,40,782 2349781 2013–14 93,16,445 1170160 95,75,497 911108 2014–15 1,13,82,974 1349937 1,16,05,236 1127675 2015–16 3,56,60,213 1829830 1,45,28,166 22961877 4. The Assessing Officer further held that the assessee has no proper explanation to offer and misleading

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

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

68 was rightly deleted where the assessee had produced all the relevant information about the creditors including name, address, details of cheques, repayment of loan by cheques; the assessee had thus discharged its primary onus and as such revenue failed genuine. to prove that the transactions were not genuine. 45. Considering the fact and circumstances of the assessment order

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

130 TTJ 213) (Vizag); and B & B Infotech Ltd. v. ITO (IT Appeal No. 726 (Bang.) of 2014). Based on the facts and the circumstances of the Appellant's case, the settled legal position referred to above, the objects and intent of the statutory provisions of the Act, it is humbly submitted that the subsidies in question should be treated

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

130 TTJ 213) (Vizag); and B & B Infotech Ltd. v. ITO (IT Appeal No. 726 (Bang.) of 2014). Based on the facts and the circumstances of the Appellant's case, the settled legal position referred to above, the objects and intent of the statutory provisions of the Act, it is humbly submitted that the subsidies in question should be treated

M/S BHAKTVASTAL SADGURU YOGIRAJ VASANTRAO GOPALRAO GHONGE MAHARAJ NYAS,,WARDHA vs. DY. C.I.T. CENTRL CIR.-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am 1) Ita No.: 040/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2011-12 2) Ita No.: 036/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2007-08 3) Ita No.: 037/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2008-09 4) Ita No.: 151/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2009-10 5) Ita No.: 152/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2010-11 6) Ita No.: 038/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2009-10 (143 R.W.S. 263) 7) Ita No.: 039/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2010-11 (143 R.W.S. 263) Bhaktvastal Sadguru Yogiraj Vasantrao Vs. The Dcit Gopalrao Ghonge Maharaj Nyas Central Circle 2(2) Mukteshwar, Behind Rashtrabhasha Nagpur Gharpure Layout, Nagri Bank Colony Wardha Pan No.:Aabtb 2675 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M.

130/-. ITA No.: 036&37/Nag/2017 : 12. These appeals by appellant are against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur for Asstt. Year 2007-08 & 2008-09 dated 24/11/2016 in Appeal Nos. CIT(A)-3/252 & 253/2013-14. The grounds raised in both the appeals are similar. Grounds of appeal for Asstt. Year 2007-08 are as under

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA GLOBAL RESOURCES LTD(EAELIER KNOWN AS GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHHERIES LTD), NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

68. Ground No.1 raised in this appeal is identical to ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal being ITA No.477/NAG/2014. Since we have dismissed the ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal and answered the issue in favour of the assessee, ground No.1 raised in this appeal is also dismissed. 69. Ground No.2, 3 and 4 raised in this appeal

ASTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIR 2(3) R, NAGPUR vs. M GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHERIES LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

68. Ground No.1 raised in this appeal is identical to ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal being ITA No.477/NAG/2014. Since we have dismissed the ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal and answered the issue in favour of the assessee, ground No.1 raised in this appeal is also dismissed. 69. Ground No.2, 3 and 4 raised in this appeal

ASSTT.C,I,.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COALFIELDS & WASHERIES LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

68. Ground No.1 raised in this appeal is identical to ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal being ITA No.477/NAG/2014. Since we have dismissed the ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal and answered the issue in favour of the assessee, ground No.1 raised in this appeal is also dismissed. 69. Ground No.2, 3 and 4 raised in this appeal

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA COAL(INDIA) LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

68. Ground No.1 raised in this appeal is identical to ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal being ITA No.477/NAG/2014. Since we have dismissed the ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal and answered the issue in favour of the assessee, ground No.1 raised in this appeal is also dismissed. 69. Ground No.2, 3 and 4 raised in this appeal

ASSTT. C.I.T, CENTRAL CIR, -2(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S GUPTA GLOBAL RESOURCES LTD(EAELIER KNOWN AS GUPTA COALFIELDS 7 WASHHERIES LTD), NAGPUR

In the result, cross objections No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

68. Ground No.1 raised in this appeal is identical to ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal being ITA No.477/NAG/2014. Since we have dismissed the ground No.1 of the Revenue‟s appeal and answered the issue in favour of the assessee, ground No.1 raised in this appeal is also dismissed. 69. Ground No.2, 3 and 4 raised in this appeal