M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

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

45,94,90,000/- 54,15,14,434/- 8,20,24,434/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 4. The summery of the cases before the ITAT is as under: S. ITA AY Appeal by Asst.Order Abated/ Additions CIT (A) No Unabated Order 1 47/NAG/2021

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

45,94,90,000/- 54,15,14,434/- 8,20,24,434/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 4. The summery of the cases before the ITAT is as under: S. ITA AY Appeal by Asst.Order Abated/ Additions CIT (A) No Unabated Order 1 47/NAG/2021

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

45,94,90,000/- 54,15,14,434/- 8,20,24,434/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 4. The summery of the cases before the ITAT is as under: S. ITA AY Appeal by Asst.Order Abated/ Additions CIT (A) No Unabated Order 1 47/NAG/2021

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

45,94,90,000/- 54,15,14,434/- 8,20,24,434/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 4. The summery of the cases before the ITAT is as under: S. ITA AY Appeal by Asst.Order Abated/ Additions CIT (A) No Unabated Order 1 47/NAG/2021

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

45,94,90,000/- 54,15,14,434/- 8,20,24,434/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 4. The summery of the cases before the ITAT is as under: S. ITA AY Appeal by Asst.Order Abated/ Additions CIT (A) No Unabated Order 1 47/NAG/2021

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

45,94,90,000/- 54,15,14,434/- 8,20,24,434/- ACIT Vs. Radha Madhav Developers ITA nos. 26,27,47,48,49, 140/Nag./2021 & CO Nos. 3, 4 5/Nag/2023 4. The summery of the cases before the ITAT is as under: S. ITA AY Appeal by Asst.Order Abated/ Additions CIT (A) No Unabated Order 1 47/NAG/2021

JAGDISH KANHAIYALAL KHUSHALANI,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

45-48 which clearly exhibits that sale consideration of ₹ 5,00,000/- (₹ 200000 + ₹ 300000) stands received by the assessee on 23.11.2011 & 28.11.2011. 7. Under these given facts where the sale consideration has been received in the preceding years through banking channel and that the sale deed has been registered in the subsequent period, proviso to section

SHRI PRALHAD CHODHARY ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.164/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Pralhadchodhary, The Assistant Commissioner Choudhary Bhawan, V Of Income Tax, Central Sakkardara, S Circle-1(3), Nagpur. Nagpur – 440032. Pan: Ahepc0847Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Umang Agrawal – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 23/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25/01/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nagpur Dated 18.03.2013 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 153C R.W.S143(3) Dated 29.12.2010 For A.Y.2007-08. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Shri Pralhad Chodhary [A]

price. 4. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in not distinguishing the word possession & the word license. The word possession in TP Act & the word license in the Indian Easement Act, 1982. 5. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in relying on the oral statement of the assessee and other co-owners as regard the declaration of income. 6. The learned

SHUBHLAXMI LAND DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

45,000 6,95,000 no.103/6, Patil Mauza Nari Total: 2,50,000 39,74,000 37,24,000 7. The assessee, vide its letter dated 21/12/2017, submitted explanation regarding violation of provisions of section 43CA of the Act, however, the 4 Shubhlaxmi Land Developers ITA no.362/Nag./2023 Assessing Officer did not accept the submissions of the assessee and held

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

price of M/s. ParagShilp Infrastructure & Services Ltd. to enable to assessee to legitimize his unaccounted fund. x) On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the entire gamut of direct & circumstantial evidence placed on record shows that claim of Long Term Capital Gain is Bogus in nature

MANISHA ASHUTOSH SHEWALKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

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

transfer of the same would result in capital gain, hence the land sold is a capital asset which is liable for capital gain tax. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made addition of ` 1,11,50,582, on account of capital gain towards 25% share in the said land. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order passed

SHREE MAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

45,771. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority. 6. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer by observing as follows:– Shree Maya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.227–228/Nag./2022 “During the appellate proceedings

SHREE MAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

45,771. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority. 6. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer by observing as follows:– Shree Maya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.227–228/Nag./2022 “During the appellate proceedings