ITAT Pune Judgments — February 2021

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1903/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

STATFIELD EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, CPC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 106/PUN/2020[2013-14 (24Q-Q3)]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1902/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

STATFIELD EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, CPC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 105/PUN/2020[2013-14 (24Q-Q2)]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

STATFIELD EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, CPC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 107/PUN/2020[2013-14 (26Q-Q2)]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

STATFIELD EQUIPMENT P LTD,PUNE vs TDS, CPC, GAZIABAD,

ITA 109/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Quarter -1 TDS statement in form 24Q)]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

STATFIELD EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, CPC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 111/PUN/2020[2014-15 (24Q-Q3)]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1908/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1906/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1904/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1910/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

RUDRA PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs ACIT (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1909/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Dismissed

The tribunal noted that both the assessees and the Revenue wished to withdraw their appeals as they had filed applications under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

SUBHASH GANGADHAR TAJANE,AHMEDNAGAR vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE, AHMEDNAGAR

ITA 415/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the tribunal.

LATE SHRI BABANLAL BHIKULAL AGRAWAL,JALGAON vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER,

ITA 18/PUN/2015[2002-03]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2002-03Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

RAGBIRSINGH M. RAJPAL,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

ITA 1085/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S. GLATT SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS ZIEMANN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE

ITA 2251/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's application and the revenue's no objection.

UTKARASH BALASAHEB PATIL,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, PUNE

ITA 2780/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Remanded

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) decided the issues ex-parte without the assessee's assistance and without sufficient material. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

SIARA ENGINEERING PVT.LTD,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 10, PUNE

ITA 3098/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO failed to record the necessary satisfaction before invoking Rule 8D(2) for disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed the deduction of Education Cess paid by the assessee.

B.J. BHANDARI PAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3), PUNE

ITA 1747/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S. B.J . BHANDARI PAPERS PVT.LTD,PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3), PUNE

ITA 1748/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2016-17Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

PRIMA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 10, PUNE

ITA 65/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that if the assessee's own funds exceed its investments, no disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) is maintainable. It also held that Education Cess paid is an allowable expenditure.

M/S. EATON POWER QUALITY PRIVATE LTD.,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

ITA 381/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal restored the transfer pricing addition to the AO/TPO for fresh determination, following a precedent for the preceding year. For the management fee disallowance, the matter was set aside to the AO to examine the receipt of services and cost allocation evidence.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14, PUNE vs MAHARASHTRA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, PUNE

ITA 2871/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal held that since no material was placed by the Revenue to show that the earlier ITAT decisions were set aside or overruled, and no distinguishing features were presented, the CIT(A)'s order was sustained.

M/S. B.J. BHANDARI PAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3), PUNE

ITA 1746/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

S.V. JEWELLERS,RATNAGIRI vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, RATNAGIRI

ITA 2803/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2007-08Withdrawn

The tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE vs GRACE DAVISION CHEMICALS (I) PVT.LTD, PUNE

ITA 2843/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2009-10Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit in the CBDT circular. The appeal was dismissed without commenting on the merits.

PRECISION AUTOMATION & ROBOTICS INDIA LTD,PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4, PUNE

ITA 443/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

PRECISION AUTOMATION & ROBOTICS INDIA LTD,PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4, PUNE

ITA 388/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

PRECISION AUTOMATION & ROBOTICS INDIA LTD.,PUNE vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

ITA 414/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2016-17Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

S.V. JEWELLERS,RATNAGIRI vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, RATNAGIRI

ITA 2804/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

S.V. JEWELLERS,RATNAGIRI vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, RATNAGIRI

ITA 2802/PUN/2017[2006-07]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2006-07Withdrawn

The tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

BAPUJIBUWA NAGARI SAH PAT SANSTHA LTD.,PUNE vs JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PUNE

ITA 946/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the assessee had a reasonable cause for non-compliance due to a bona fide belief that its activities were at par with a bank. The penalty was deleted as there was no intention to evade taxes.

SURESH NARAYAN AMBEKAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, AHMEDNAGAR

ITA 1634/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The assessee is at liberty to seek restoration if the Vivad se Vishwas application is disapproved.

SURESH CHUNNILAL SHARMA,PARBHANI vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - PARBHANI, PARBHANI

ITA 1883/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the cash payment for stock-in-trade violated Section 40A(3) and that the case did not fall under any exceptions prescribed in Rule 6DD. Following the jurisdictional High Court's precedent, the disallowance was upheld.

MINDA RINDER PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs ACIT, CIRCLE-10, PUNE

ITA 2035/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that transfer pricing adjustments should be made only in respect of international transactions, not at the entity level. It directed the AO/TPO to verify the assessee's calculation of proportionate adjustment based on the value of international transactions to total operating costs.

M/S. AJAY BIO TECH (INDIA) LTD,PUNE vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, PUNE

ITA 1225/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

ADITI FOODS (INDIA) PVT.LTD,SANGLI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -2, SANGLI

ITA 467/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI VINOD MALSIBHAI GADA,PUNE vs ACIT CIRCLE-5, PUNE

ITA 1913/PUN/2019[2010-11]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

WATER FRONT CONDOMINIUM,PUNE vs DY. CIT, CIRCLE-7, PUNE

ITA 2049/PUN/2019[2008-09]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

MRC HANDLING SOLUTIONS,PUNE vs DCIT, CIRCLE-12, PUNE

ITA 2108/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SARANGA MAHENDRA BAHIRAT,PUNE vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5 (2), PUNE

ITA 605/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the appellant's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

MRC HANDLING SOLUTIONS,PUNE vs DCIT, CIRCLE-12, PUNE

ITA 2107/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SMT. SURUCHI RAJENDRA MUGDIYA,AURANGABAD vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (1), AURANGABAD

ITA 1322/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The assessee was granted liberty to restore the appeal if the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme application was disapproved.

M/S. GRACE DAVISON CHEMICALS INDIA PVT.LTD,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE

ITA 232/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

PRATAP BALAJI NIKAM,PUNE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 3, PUNE

ITA 2226/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2009-10Remanded

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence, finding a reasonable cause for its late submission. The issue was set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

PRIYADARSHANI POLYSACKS LTD,KOLHAPUR vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER,(TDS), KOLHAPUR

ITA 1367/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SUSHMA MANOHAR ZOLE,KOLHAPUR vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, ICHALKRANJI

ITA 1316/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the issue was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

ABHIJIT AJIT GUNE,KOLHAPUR vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (1), KOLHAPUR

ITA 588/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

URMILA SANJAY YENPURE,PUNE vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), PUNE

ITA 173/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The ITAT granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

PRIYADARSHANI POLYSACKS LTD,KOLHAPUR vs INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (TDS), KOLHAPUR

ITA 1400/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.