ITAT Pune Judgments — November 2019

C & M FARMING LTD,NASHIK vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2016/PUN/2017[2015-16(Q4-27EQ)]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019Allowed

The Tribunal held that the imposition of late fee under Section 234E read with Section 200A was not maintainable as the enabling procedure for computation of late fee was inserted prospectively from June 1, 2015. Therefore, the late fee confirmed by the CIT(A) was set aside.

M/S. BIPIN METAL PRODUCTS,DHULE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DHULE

ITA 489/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned orders and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to recompute additions based on the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co.

C & M FARMING LTD,NASHIK vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2013/PUN/2017[2015-16 (Q1-24Q)]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019Allowed

The Tribunal held that the imposition of late fee under Section 234E read with Section 200A was not maintainable as the enabling procedure for computation of late fee was inserted prospectively from June 1, 2015. Therefore, the late fee confirmed by the CIT(A) was set aside.

C & M FARMING LTD,NASHIK vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2017/PUN/2017[2015-16 (Q4-27EQ)]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019Allowed

The Tribunal held that the imposition of late fee under Section 234E read with Section 200A was not maintainable as the enabling procedure for computation of late fee was inserted prospectively from June 1, 2015. Therefore, the late fee confirmed by the CIT(A) was set aside.

M/S. BIPIN METAL PRODUCTS,DHULE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DHULE

ITA 490/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019AY 2011-12Partly Allowed

The Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned orders and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to recompute additions based on the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co.

TRIMBAK HATCHERIES PVT. LTD.,NASHIK vs ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NASHIK

ITA 951/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019AY 2008-09Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the sale of assets resulted in capital gains, not business income. Therefore, brought forward business losses could not be set off against these capital gains, following its own prior decision for the assessment year 2007-08.

C & M FARMING LTD,NASHIK vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2015/PUN/2017[2015-16 (Q3-24Q)]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2019Allowed

The Tribunal held that the imposition of late fee under Section 234E read with Section 200A was not maintainable as the enabling procedure for computation of late fee was inserted prospectively from June 1, 2015. Therefore, the late fee confirmed by the CIT(A) was set aside.