CIT v. Prasanna Dugar

371 ITR 19High Court2015#1822 most cited
63

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Prasanna Dugar · penalty under section 271(1)(c) · section 274 notice · concealment of income · inaccurate particulars · search assessment · section 132 · SLP dismissal

Also reported as

59 Taxmann.com 99279 CTR 86

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 148Section 153ASection 274Section 147Section 132Section 276C

Issues it is cited on

section 276csection 276section 40a(ia)section 142(2a)penalty under section 271(1)(c)section 271aabfurnishing inaccurate particularsstatement under section 132(4)penalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 274concealment of incomesection 270

Judgments citing CIT v. Prasanna Dugar

Sh Amit Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 41/ASR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. Vs. DCIT M/s Ose Infrastructure Ltd. v/s ACIT, New Delhi in ITA (ii) No.5891 to 5895/Del/2016 dated 14th August, 2018 9. On the contrary, the Ld. CIT DR relied upon the judgment passed by the Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar [2015] 371 ITR 19 (Kol) and submitted that all the cases relied upon by the assessee qua non-recovery of incriminating material did not deal with the Explanation-5A of Sec.271(1) (c) of the Act as the same pertains to the previous year when the provisions of Explanatio- 5A were not introduced. The Ld. CIT DR also relied upon the order passed by the ITAT Bench at Ja…

Sh Amit Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 40/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. Vs. DCIT M/s Ose Infrastructure Ltd. v/s ACIT, New Delhi in ITA (ii) No.5891 to 5895/Del/2016 dated 14th August, 2018 9. On the contrary, the Ld. CIT DR relied upon the judgment passed by the Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar [2015] 371 ITR 19 (Kol) and submitted that all the cases relied upon by the assessee qua non-recovery of incriminating material did not deal with the Explanation-5A of Sec.271(1) (c) of the Act as the same pertains to the previous year when the provisions of Explanatio- 5A were not introduced. The Ld. CIT DR also relied upon the order passed by the ITAT Bench at Ja…

Sh. Kasturi Lal Mahajan, Jammu vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jammu

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands allowed

ITA 190/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiita No.46 /Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…. Vs. DCIT M/s Ose Infrastructure Ltd. v/s ACIT, New Delhi in ITA (ii) No.5891 to 5895/Del/2016 dated 14th August, 2018 9. On the contrary, the Ld. CIT DR relied upon the judgment passed by the Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar [2015] 371 ITR 19 (Kol) and submitted that all the cases relied upon by the assessee qua non-recovery of incriminating material did not deal with the Explanation-5A of Sec.271(1) (c) of the Act as the same pertains to the previous year when the provisions of Explanatio- 5A were not introduced. The Ld. CIT DR also relied upon the order passed by the ITAT Bench at Ja…

M/S. Guruprasad Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1658/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1658-1659/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2010-2011 & 2011-12 M/S. Guruprasad Infrastructure D.C.I.T, Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Central Circle-1, 9, Shei Ram Nagar, B/H Rto, Baroda. Warasia Colony, Vadodara-390006. Pan: Aadcg6787C

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ B’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1658-1659/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2010-2011 & 2011-12 M/s. Guruprasad Infrastructure D.C.I.T, Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Central Circle-1, 9, Shei Ram Nagar, B/h RTO, Baroda. Warasia Colony, Vadodara-390006. PAN: AADCG6787C (Applicant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Shri S.N. Soparkar & Shri Nishith Shah, A.Rs : Revenue by Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 08/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date o…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saviour Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4818/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Shashwat Bajpai and Shri Sharad Agarwal, Advocates
Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH ’G’: NEW DELHI BENCH : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT AND AND AND , JUDICIAL MEMBER MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No 4818/Del/2014 ITA ITA No No 4818/D…

Mahesh Alamchandani, L.R. of Late Shri Ashanand Alamchandani, Godhra vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Baroda

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 159/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 271(1)(c)

…the Revenue, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the revenue authorities and also relied upon the decision ITA Nos. 159 to 163/Ahd/17 [ Mahesh Alamchandani vs. AC IT] - 5 – of the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar 371 ITR 19 (Cal) in justification of the action of the Revenue. The learned DR further submitted that SLP against the aforesaid judgment of the Calcutta high Court also stands dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in 373 ITR 681 (SC). 10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In terms of the plea raised, the central question that…

Crew Bos Products Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Faridabad

ITA 5236/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Beg, Senior DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…) Ltd. – 327 ITR 510 (Delhi); Mak Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT – 358 ITR 593 (SC); UOI vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors – 295 ITR 244; B.A. Balasubramaniam & Bros. Co. vs. CIT – 236 ITR 977; CIT vs. Gates Foam & Rubber Co. – 91 ITR 467; CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar – 371 ITR 19 (Cal.); ACIT vs. Smt. J. Mythili – 35 taxmann.com 86; Smt. Kran Devi vs. ACIT – (2009) 125 TTJ 631 (Delhi); CIT vs. S.J. Prasad – (2008) 220 CTR 169 (Ker.); and CIT vs. Smt. Meera Devi – (2012) 26 txmann.com 132 (Delhi). 10. First of all, when we examine satisfaction recorded by the AO in para 3 of the assessment order which reads as, “For the…

Crew Bos Products Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Faridabad

ITA 5235/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Beg, Senior DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…) Ltd. – 327 ITR 510 (Delhi); Mak Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT – 358 ITR 593 (SC); UOI vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors – 295 ITR 244; B.A. Balasubramaniam & Bros. Co. vs. CIT – 236 ITR 977; CIT vs. Gates Foam & Rubber Co. – 91 ITR 467; CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar – 371 ITR 19 (Cal.); ACIT vs. Smt. J. Mythili – 35 taxmann.com 86; Smt. Kran Devi vs. ACIT – (2009) 125 TTJ 631 (Delhi); CIT vs. S.J. Prasad – (2008) 220 CTR 169 (Ker.); and CIT vs. Smt. Meera Devi – (2012) 26 txmann.com 132 (Delhi). 10. First of all, when we examine satisfaction recorded by the AO in para 3 of the assessment order which reads as, “For the…

M/S. Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the application filed under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2045/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountnat Member & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: 1. the Learned CIT(A) has erred in law & facts of the case in sustaining the pen
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 4

…unt attributable to him in investment in property. Hon’ble P&H High Court held that no immunity could be claimed by assessee from levy of penalty in terms of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) 2 CIT Vs Prasanna Duqar T20151 59 taxmann.com 99 (Calcutta)/T20151 371 ITR 19 (Calcutta)(MAG.)/r20151 279 CTR 86 (Calcutta) Where Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that even where subsequent to search, O' assessee voluntarily disclosed a sum and offered said sum to tax, since said amount was not disclosed in original return, penalty levied under section 271(1 )(c) was justified 7 ITA No.2044 & 2045/Del/2014; 3. ACIT Vs Smt…

M/S. Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the application filed under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2044/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountnat Member & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: 1. the Learned CIT(A) has erred in law & facts of the case in sustaining the pen
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 4

…unt attributable to him in investment in property. Hon’ble P&H High Court held that no immunity could be claimed by assessee from levy of penalty in terms of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) 2 CIT Vs Prasanna Duqar T20151 59 taxmann.com 99 (Calcutta)/T20151 371 ITR 19 (Calcutta)(MAG.)/r20151 279 CTR 86 (Calcutta) Where Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that even where subsequent to search, O' assessee voluntarily disclosed a sum and offered said sum to tax, since said amount was not disclosed in original return, penalty levied under section 271(1 )(c) was justified 7 ITA No.2044 & 2045/Del/2014; 3. ACIT Vs Smt…

DCIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Spaze Tower Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the application filed under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2558/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountnat Member & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: 1. the Learned CIT(A) has erred in law & facts of the case in sustaining the pen
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 4

…unt attributable to him in investment in property. Hon’ble P&H High Court held that no immunity could be claimed by assessee from levy of penalty in terms of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) 2 CIT Vs Prasanna Duqar T20151 59 taxmann.com 99 (Calcutta)/T20151 371 ITR 19 (Calcutta)(MAG.)/r20151 279 CTR 86 (Calcutta) Where Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that even where subsequent to search, O' assessee voluntarily disclosed a sum and offered said sum to tax, since said amount was not disclosed in original return, penalty levied under section 271(1 )(c) was justified 7 ITA No.2044 & 2045/Del/2014; 3. ACIT Vs Smt…

Surabi Bullion, Coimbatore vs. DCIT 1, Coimbatore

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2568/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2568/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs The Dcit, M/S. Surabi Bullion, 98/1, Vairam Street, Central Circle 1, Coimbatore – 1. Coimbatore. Pan: Abrfs7669H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: 24.07.2018
Section 132Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"ी, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2568/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs The DCIT, M/s. Surabi Bullion, 98/1, Vairam Street, Central Circle 1, Coimbatore – 1. Coimbatore. PAN: ABRFS7669H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri D. Anand, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, JCIT ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by…

Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2871/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…concealment of income. He has submitted that since no original return was filed disclosing the returned income, therefore, penalty was rightly imposed. He has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar (2015) 371 ITR 19 (Calcutta) (HC), Order of ITAT, Madras Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Smt. J. Mythili 35 taxmann.com 86, Order of ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Smt. Kiran Devi vs. ACIT (2009) 125 TTJ 631 (Del.), Judgment of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. S.J. Prasad (2008) 220 CTR 169 (Kerala), Judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v…

Sanjay D. Kakade, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 17/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

Sanjay D. Kakade, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 15/PUN/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

Sanjay D. Kakade, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 14/PUN/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

Sanjay D. Kakade, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 13/PUN/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

Sanjay D. Kakade, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 12/PUN/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

M/S Kakade Construction Company, Pune vs. ACIT, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 102/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…

M/S Kakade Construction Company, Pune vs. ACIT, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 101/PUN/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Sri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.12 To 17/Pun/2013 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2008-09 वष"

For Respondent: Sri Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.12 to 17/PUN/2013 अपील…