How many judgments cite PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.?

272 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (396 ITR 5), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 151, Section 1961, Section 68.

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.

396 ITR 5High Court2017#293 most cited

What is PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

272

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. · reassessment · section 148 · investigation wing · accommodation entries · tangible material · assessing officer · application of mind · live link · section 147

Also reported as

83 Taxmann.com 348249 Taxmann 610

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 151 Section 1961 Section 68 Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

sanction under section 151 material facts necessary for assessment live link section 151(1)borrowed satisfaction sanctioning authority first proviso to section 147 non application of mind section 151(2)tangible material share capital and share premium non-application of mind

Judgments citing PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.

Agasthya Auto Products LLP, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 38(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1947/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargagasthya Auto Products Llp, Vs. Ito, 15, Godavari Apartments, Ward-38(1), Alaknanda, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abbfa9335N

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdcFor Respondent: Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…recorded by the AO, respectfully following the decision of jurisdictional High Court of Delhi, as has been vehemently relied by the ld counsel of the assessee, in the cases of PCIT Vs. Meenashi Overseas 395 ITR 677 (Delhi), PCIT Vs. RMG Polyvinyl (India) Ltd 396 ITR 5 (Del) wherein, their lordship speaking for the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that where the reasons recorded by the AO failed to demonstrate link between the tangible material and the formation of reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment, then, indeed it amounts to borrowed satisfaction and the conclusion of the AO based o…

Palm Tracom LLP, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 38(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1944/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargpalm Tracom Llp, Vs. Ito, Shop 103, Ff, Deepali Ward-38(1), Chowk, Csc-Ii, Up Samaj, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi- 110034 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaqfp8495G Assessee By : Ms. Rano Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sumes Swani, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2023

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumes Swani, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…recorded by the AO, respectfully following the decision of jurisdictional High Court of Delhi, as has been vehemently relied by the ld counsel of the assessee, in the cases of PCIT Vs. Meenashi Overseas 395 ITR 677 (Delhi), PCIT Vs. RMG Polyvinyl (India) Ltd 396 ITR 5 (Del) wherein, their lordship speaking for the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that where the reasons recorded by the AO failed to demonstrate link between the tangible material and the formation of reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment, then, indeed it Palm Tracom LLP amounts to borrowed satisfaction and the conclusion o…

Magpie Marketing LLP, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 38(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1943/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

…es from Star Delta and Transmission. Vehemently relying on the various judgements including judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the cases of PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.) and PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (India) Ltd. 396 ITR 5 (Del), the learned AR submitted that the initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act, notice u/s. 148 of that and all assessment proceedings and orders may kindly be quashed only on two count. 4. Replying to the above, the ld. Senior DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that at the time of recording reasons the…

Saurabh Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 63(5), New Delhi

ITA 4875/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…incipal Commissioner of Income Tax-6 Versus Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 395 ITR 677. (ii) PR. Commissioner of Income Tax-4 Versus G & G Pharma India Ltd., [2016] 384 ITR 147 (iii) Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., [2017] 396 ITR 5 (iv) Anirudh Kumar vs ITO,ITA No. 1167/Del/2019, dt. 21.07.2022 (v) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (vi) CIT vs. Jet Airways Other Citation: (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) (vii) Rajesh Kumar Vs. ITO, ITA No. 1465/Del/2020, dt. 03.08.2022 7. On the other hand learned DR supported the orders of learned tax authorities below…

R.K.Machine Tools Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-20(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6616/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2010-11] M/s R.K. Machine Tools Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, D-20, Basement, Geetanjali Ward-20(3), Enclave Malviya Nagar, Vs C.R. Building, New Delhi New Delhi PAN-AAACR0328K Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA Revenue by Sh. Akhilesh Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 26.04.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals)-7, New Delhi,…

Deepak Jain, C-Scheme vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Bhagwan Das Road

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 196/JPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 44ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 196/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 cuke Sh. Deepak Jain ITO D-47, Chomu House C-Scheme Vs. Ward 2(1), Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPJ 7359 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Monisha…

DCIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1177/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usasstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd,B- Central Circle-15, 393, Zakir Nagar So, South East Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi-1100025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHIBENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member Asstt. Year: 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. BDR Builders & Developers P. Ltd,B- Central Circle-15, 393, Zakir Nagar SO, South East Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi-1100025 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A)-26, New Delhi dated 23.02.202…

Diya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated herein above

ITA 1929/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Diya Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 1373, Rani Bagh, Shakur Ward-7(3), Basti, Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Aaccd3991L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Nargas, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…15. 2. Further reliance is placed on following judgments: • Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pro CIT V. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 395 ITR 677 • Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pro CIT V. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 5 • Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. V. ACIT in WP No. 1357/2016 dated 25.09.2017 • Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT V. Dharamvir Singh Rao in SLP No. 32400/2017. • Shiv Sai Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. V. Dy. CIT, W.P.(C) 2158/2016 & 2383/2016 dt. 23.07.2018 (Delhi) • ITAT Delhi in the case of MRY Auto Comp…

Sahil Bajaj, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward-4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4076/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Shaantanu Jain Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 141Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…dings and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. 11. In the case of Udesh Sharma vs. ITO (supra), the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal by taking respectful cognizance of the judgement of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs.RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5 (Del), CIT vs. SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd., 345 ITR 223 (Del) and judgement in the case of PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677, held as follows:- “6.7 The Hon‟ble High Court in the referred cases clearly held that it is established principle of law that if a particular authority has been designated to record his/her satisfaction on a part…

Parvinder Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 8153/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 148

…ee does not want to press application for admission of ground No.7.1, hence the application of the assessee is partly allowed. 6. Placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5 (Del), the ld. Counsel submitted that where the information was received from Investigation Wing that the assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entries, but, no further inquiry was undertaken by the AO, the said information could not have been said to be tangible 3 material per se and, thus, reassessment on said basis is not justified. Further…

Shri Madho Lal Saini, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 238/JPR/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Shri S. Najmi (CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 54BSection 54FSection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 238/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2007-08. cuke Shri Madho Lal Saini, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 60, Patel Nagar, Ward No.16, Ward 2(3), Bais Godown Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. CMTPM 9243 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 728/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :…

B.R Goel & Sons (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 47(4), New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 9084/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 B.R. Goel & Sons (Huf) Ito, Ward 47(4), Drum 1228, Kaccha Bagh, Shape Building, I.P Chandani Chowk, Delhi Vs. Extension, New Delhi 110006 110002 Pin Aadhb5670C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Shri C.S Anand, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri C.S Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…Act is incorrect and in valid. Therefore in view of various judgments of Hon’ble High Courts and orders of the coordinate Benches of the Tribunal especially Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del), when the required conditions for initiation of reassessment proceedings are not satisfied then the reassessment order has to be held as invalid. 4. The learned counsel has also placed reliance on the order of ITAT Delhi Bench dated 11.06.2020 in ITA 7437/Del/2018 for A.Y. 2009-10 in the case of Omvir Singh vs. ITO and submitted that under i…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. M/S. Roland Educational and Charitable Trust

ITA/25/2022HC Orissa09 Feb 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Parbati Mohapatra

ITA/19/2022HC Orissa08 Feb 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Success International, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward- 51(4), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 7301/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmasuccess International, Vs. Ito, C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates, Ward-51(4), Ca L-7A, )Lgf), South Extn, New Delhi Part-Ii, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxfs3915K

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69C

…ys Ltd (2012) 248 CTR (Del) 33, Ganesh Ganga Investments Pvt. Ltd ITa NO. 1579/Del/2019, SNG Developers Ltd 404 ITR 312 (Del), Ankita A. Choksey Vs. ITO & Ors 411 ITR 207, M/s. KLA Foods (India) Ltd & Ors ITA No. 2846/Del/2015, PCIT Vs. RMG Polyvinyal (I) Ltd 396 ITR 5 (Del), Vijay Haishchandra Patel Vs. ITO 400 ITR 167, Shree Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd ITA No. 5798/Del/2016 Success International Vs. ITO, 7. Referring to the copy of approval u/s 151 available at page 3 of the paper book it was submitted that ld Pr. CIT has given mechanical approval without application of mind. As with regard to mechan…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Snowshine Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1443/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept

Section 147

…, (P) Ltd V. B.N.Panda, DCIT (1993) 200 ITR 710 (Born) 9. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the ratio laid down by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax V. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd (2017) 83 Taxmann.com 348 ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 & CO 103 & 104/Bang/2018 ITA No.1443/Bang/2018 & CO No.105/Bang/2018 M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Snowshine Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 5 of 49 (Delhi), wherein it is held that, the information received from Investigation Wing could not be said to be tangible material perse w…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1442/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept

Section 147

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1-(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1441/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept

Section 147

ITO Ward - 10(4), New Delhi vs. Gungun Gold Infra Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5143/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaito, Vs. Gungun Gold Infra Pvt. Ltd, 3Rd Floor, 1185, Kucha Ward-10(4), New Delhi Mahajani, Chandni Chowk, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aahcs7132B

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…her, the Court followed the decision of RDS Projects Ltd.(supra) in Vedanta Ltd.. iv. In Rakesh Gupta v CIT [2018] 93 taxmann.com 271(P&H), decision of Meenakshi Overseas Ltd(Supra) and Pr. CITv. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. [20171 83 taxmann.com 348/249 Taxman 610/396 ITR 5 (Delhi) was considered and distinguished and reopening was treated as valid by Punjab & Haryana High Court observing that the A.O. has shown independent application of mind in respect of information received from Investigation Wing and live link between the tangible material and reason to believe was shown. And for the same reasons, the decision of…

Sharad Vithoba Navale, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2 (2), Pune

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 266/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godarashri Dadasaheb Vithoba Navale Dcit, Central Circle 2(2) At Post Ekhatpur Pune Vs. Taluka - Sangola Distt. Solapur 413307 Pan –Abppn6740E Appellant Respondent Shri Sharad Vithoba Navale Dcit, Central Circle 2(2) At Post Ekhatpur Pune Vs. Taluka - Sangola Distt. Solapur 413307 Pan –Abppn6740E Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Suhas Bora Respondent By: Shri M.G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing: 28.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.08.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, Jm These Twin Assessees’ As Many Appeals For Assessment Year 2012-13, Arise Against The Cit(A)-12, Pune’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 30.11.2018, Passed In Case Nos. No. Pn/Cit (A)-12/10778/2016-17 & No. Pn/Cit (A)- 12/10800/2016-17, Respectively Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Dadasaheb Vithoba Navale DCIT, Central Circle 2(2) At Post Ekhatpur Pune Vs. Taluka - Sangola Distt. Solapur 413307 PAN –ABPPN6740E Appellant Respondent Shri Sharad Vithoba Navale DCIT, Central Circle 2(2) At Post Ekhatpur Pune Vs. Taluka - Sangola Distt. Solapur 413307 PAN –ABPPN6740E Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Suhas Bora Respondent by: Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of Hearing: 28.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 25.08.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, JM These twin assessees’ as many appeals for assessment ye…