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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) situated at 1st Floor, Mangalam Icon, Ramnagar Square, Nagpur

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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) situated at 1st Floor, Mangalam Icon, Ramnagar Square, Nagpur

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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) situated at 1st Floor, Mangalam Icon, Ramnagar Square, Nagpur

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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) situated at 1st Floor, Mangalam Icon, Ramnagar Square, Nagpur

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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) situated at 1st Floor, Mangalam Icon, Ramnagar Square, Nagpur

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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) situated at 1st Floor, Mangalam Icon, Ramnagar Square, Nagpur

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

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

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022 Name of the Assessee M/s AVC Homes (PAN:AAZFM2044B) UMESH THAKRE (PAN: ADTPT6214B) YRCE EDUCARE PVT LTD (PAN: AAACY6482D) ATUL YAMSANWAR (PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q) 30 Umesh Sadashiv Thakre Α.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 5 ITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022 6 Ν.Α. VISHWAS CHAKNALWAR (PAN: ABDPC0828J

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

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022 ATUL YAMSANWAR (PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q) 31 Umesh Sadashiv Thakre Α.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 5 ITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022 VISHWAS CHAKNALWAR (PAN: ABDPC0828J) 6 Ν.Α. M/S A V REALITIES (PAN: ABFFA9554M) 2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that during the previous

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

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

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022 30 Umesh Sadashiv Thakre Α.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 5 ITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022 6 Ν.Α. VISHWAS CHAKNALWAR (PAN: ABDPC0828J) M/S A V REALITIES (PAN: ABFFA9554M) 2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that during the previous hearing on 18/02/2025, this

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022 ATUL YAMSANWAR (PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q) 5 ITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022 VISHWAS CHAKNALWAR (PAN: ABDPC0828J) 6 Ν.Α. M/S A V REALITIES (PAN: ABFFA9554M) 2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that during the previous hearing on 18/02/2025, this office had filed written submission wherein confidential letters having F.No. Addl

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

68,000, was made on account of alleged commission income. A survey action under section 133A of the Act was also carried out at the official premises of assessee i.e., M/s. SNJ & Associates, (a Partnership Firm in which Shri Sanjay Jain, who is a Chartered Accountant, is also a Partner) 5 Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain ITA no.53, to 59/Nag

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

249 TO 256 AND ITA 259 ATUL YAMSANWAR\nΤΟ 263/ΝAG/2022\n(PAN: ΑΑΕPY4543Q)\n31\nUmesh Sadashiv Thakre\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19,\n2019-20 & 2020-21\n5\nITA/238 & 264/NAG/2022\n6\nΝ.Α.\nVISHWAS CHAKNALWAR\n(PAN: ABDPC0828J)\nM/S A V REALITIES\n(PAN: ABFFA9554M)\n2. With respect to the abovementioned cases, it is submitted that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

249 ITR 533 (Bom) and CIT(E) v/s Audyogik– shikshan Mandal [2019] 101 taxmann.com 247 (Bom.) has upheld the interpretation that the legislature did not contemplate the denial of the benefit of section 11 of the Act to the entire income of the trust/charitable institution. If the interpretation sought by the Revenue is accepted, it would lead to grave

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

249 ITR 533 (Bom) and CIT(E) v/s Audyogik– shikshan Mandal [2019] 101 taxmann.com 247 (Bom.) has upheld the interpretation that the legislature did not contemplate the denial of the benefit of section 11 of the Act to the entire income of the trust/charitable institution. If the interpretation sought by the Revenue is accepted, it would lead to grave

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

249 ITR 533 (Bom) and CIT(E) v/s Audyogik– shikshan Mandal [2019] 101 taxmann.com 247 (Bom.) has upheld the interpretation that the legislature did not contemplate the denial of the benefit of section 11 of the Act to the entire income of the trust/charitable institution. If the interpretation sought by the Revenue is accepted, it would lead to grave

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

68 of the Act. Ground is, thus, allowed.” 6. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative relied on the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and prayed that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) be reversed. He submitted that the transactions are colourable device and corporate vial may be lifted. 7. Per–contra, the learned Authorised Representative

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

68 of the Act. Ground is, thus, allowed.” 6. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative relied on the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and prayed that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) be reversed. He submitted that the transactions are colourable device and corporate vial may be lifted. 7. Per–contra, the learned Authorised Representative

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

68 of the Act. Ground is, thus, allowed.” 6. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative relied on the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and prayed that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) be reversed. He submitted that the transactions are colourable device and corporate vial may be lifted. 7. Per–contra, the learned Authorised Representative