Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakar Pat Sanstha Ltd, Kolhapur vs. PCIT-1, Pune
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed
ITA 1049/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Pcit-1, Pune Sahakar Pat Sanstha Vs. A/P Hattiwade, Ajara, Kolhapur – 416505 Pan: Aaaam2608K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None (Written Submission Filed) Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2026 O R D E R
For Appellant: None (written submission filed)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)
…orts Ltd. (supra) taking the same view. Further in support that there were two views possible at the time when the Assessing Officer passed the order, reliance was placed upon the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Gogineni Tobacco Ltd (1999) 238 ITR 970 which relies upon the orders passed under the Act indicating the issue is debatable. Without prejudice to the above, it is also submitted that from a bare reading of the statement of case it is clear that the Assessing Officer had allowed deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act only after due application of mind. In support of the aforesaid, he…
