VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

2)(a)(1). 42. Here itself, it would not be out of place to mention that status of "cooperative society" had been conferred on Regional Rural Banks, as the "appellant RRB" is, by virtue of section 22 read with section 32 of Regional Rural Bank Act 1976, and not by circular no. 319 dated

VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

2)(a)(1). 42. Here itself, it would not be out of place to mention that status of "cooperative society" had been conferred on Regional Rural Banks, as the "appellant RRB" is, by virtue of section 22 read with section 32 of Regional Rural Bank Act 1976, and not by circular no. 319 dated

DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

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

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

68,23,460, which comprised of contingent liability to the tune of ` 54,95,265, additional impact of ICDS to the tune of ` 3,43,462 and lesser deduction under section 80P of the Act to the tune of ` 9,84,733. The learned A.R. for the assessee pleaded that this ground was taken by the assesse before

DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2, CHANDRAPUR

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

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

68,23,460, which comprised of contingent liability to the tune of ` 54,95,265, additional impact of ICDS to the tune of ` 3,43,462 and lesser deduction under section 80P of the Act to the tune of ` 9,84,733. The learned A.R. for the assessee pleaded that this ground was taken by the assesse before

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

2,00,00,000/- M/s Blue View Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 3,00,00,000/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 M/s Raj Laxmi Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,00,00,000/- -------------------- Total Rs. 6,00,00,000/- Α.Υ. 2015-16 M/s Umang Trading

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

2,00,00,000/- M/s Blue View Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 3,00,00,000/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 M/s Raj Laxmi Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,00,00,000/- -------------------- Total Rs. 6,00,00,000/- Α.Υ. 2015-16 M/s Umang Trading

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

2,00,00,000/- M/s Blue View Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 3,00,00,000/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 M/s Raj Laxmi Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,00,00,000/- -------------------- Total Rs. 6,00,00,000/- Α.Υ. 2015-16 M/s Umang Trading

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

2,00,00,000/- M/s Blue View Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 3,00,00,000/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 M/s Raj Laxmi Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,00,00,000/- -------------------- Total Rs. 6,00,00,000/- Α.Υ. 2015-16 M/s Umang Trading

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

2,00,00,000/- M/s Blue View Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 3,00,00,000/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 M/s Raj Laxmi Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,00,00,000/- -------------------- Total Rs. 6,00,00,000/- Α.Υ. 2015-16 M/s Umang Trading

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

2,00,00,000/- M/s Blue View Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 3,00,00,000/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 M/s Raj Laxmi Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,00,00,000/- -------------------- Total Rs. 6,00,00,000/- Α.Υ. 2015-16 M/s Umang Trading

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

32. The contention of the learned Counsel that the assessee being an individual is not required to explain the source of source is tenable. Even otherwise also, the assessee has discharged the onus which lies upon him under section 68 by furnishing legal and cogent evidence like Ledger Account confirmation, ITR, Audited Financial Statements, Bank Account of the Lender

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , 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

section 68 have been invoked only on the basis of non-furnishing of tax returns and bank statement of lenders. 2 Ravindra Madanlal Khandelwal ITA no.375/Nag./2024 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned First Appellate Authority was justified in endorsing disallowing of interest income of Rs.74,32

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

32. The contention of the learned Counsel that the assessee being an individual is not required to explain the source of source is tenable. Even otherwise also, the assessee has discharged the onus which lies upon him under section 68 by furnishing legal and cogent evidence like Ledger Account confirmation, ITR, Audited Financial Statements, Bank Account of the Lender

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

32. The contention of the learned Counsel that the assessee being an individual is not required to explain the source of source is tenable. Even otherwise also, the assessee has discharged the onus which lies upon him under section 68 by furnishing legal and cogent evidence like Ledger Account confirmation, ITR, Audited Financial Statements, Bank Account of the Lender

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

32. The contention of the learned Counsel that the assessee being an individual is not required to explain the source of source is tenable. Even otherwise also, the assessee has discharged the onus which lies upon him under section 68 by furnishing legal and cogent evidence like Ledger Account confirmation, ITR, Audited Financial Statements, Bank Account of the Lender

THE DY. C.I.T., CENTRAL CIR. 2(1),, NAGPUR vs. M/S MAHAVIR COAL RESOURCES PVT. LTD.,,

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for A

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

section 68 of the Act. It was submitted that 4 M/s. Mahavir Coal Resources Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year – 2011–12 relief granted by learned CIT(A) be reversed and the order passed by the Assessing Officer be restored. 6. The gist of submission, as submitted by the learned Counsel for the assessee is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:– “Ground

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

32,54,426/- after making following additions:– 1 Unexplained money u/s 69A ` 16,73,500/- 2 Unexplained money u/s 69A ` 2,50,000/- 3 Unexplained money u/s 69A ` 7,00,000/- 4 Unexplained money u/s 69A ` 37,45,500/- 5 Unexplained money u/s 69A ` 71,93,666/- 4 M/s. Metrocity Homes A.Y. 2017–18 6 Unexplained money

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

32 Umesh Sadashiv Thakre Α.Υ. 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Annexure-2 Confidential- On the request of the Addl. CIT, CR-1&2, Nagpur and the ACIT (Central) 2(1), Nagpur, vide letter F.No. Addl.CIT-CR-2/Yamsanwar Gr./AMY/2021-22 dated 16.07.2021, a Deviation Meeting was held