“NFAC”

Mr. Yogesh Kulthe, Airoli, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Panvel, Dist. Raigad

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.940/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

also dismissed the appeal of the appellant in limine without going into the merits of the issues. It is a trite law that the NFAC should have dealt with the merits of the issue in appeal, even in the case of ex-parte order. From the perusal of the impugned

Sunita Mohan Patil, Nashik vs. ACIT 1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.939/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the ex parte order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 17.11.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, we find the appeal is time barred by 109 days in filing

Sandeep Satyanarayan Biyani, Aurangabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.925/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sandeep Satyanarayan Biyani, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Plot No.98, Flat No.03, Aurangabad Parvati App., Jyoti Nagar, Aurangabad - 431002 Maharashtra Pan : Alepb6232G Appellant Respondent

INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 21.03.2024 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, no regular return ... appeal No.2, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for remand of the matter to the file of the NFAC for de novo consideration in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 9. In the result, the appeal filed

Baba Shivaji Khawale, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-8(3), Pune

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2016-17 Baba Shivaji Khawale, 1264, Near Nagraj Body Builder, Chikhali, Pune-411062. Pan: Bqapk3725R. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(3), Pune. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr B B Mane Through Mr Ankesh[‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Umashankar Prasad [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 23/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2024 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfas/S/250/2023- 24/1062105966(1) Dt. 06/03/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] Passed Which In Turn Confirmed The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act By The National Faceless Assessment Centre [‘Neac’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter];

ITBA/NFAS/S/250/2023- 24/1062105966(1) dt. 06/03/2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed which in turn confirmed the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [‘NeAC’ hereinafter ... 21/03/2022 framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 3.3 Aggrieved assessee unsuccessfully contested former addition in an appeal before Ld. NFAC. 4. Aggrieved by the order of first appellate authority the assessee came in present appeal with following grounds; 1. The appellant, an individual lacking knowledge

Pallavi Constructions, Parbhani vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Jalna

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.741/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 12.02.2024 for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the business ... vide order dated 16.03.2021 completed the assessment u/s.143(3) disallowing 10% of labour payment which comes to Rs.31,26,598/-. Thereafter, the NFAC initiated penalty proceedings u/s.270A(1) r.w.s.270A(9) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC

Ramrao Tukaram Patil, Nashik vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.736/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 14.02.2024 for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, no regular return

Yashwant Limji Chaudhari, Nashik vs. ITO, Ward1(1), Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.715/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Yashwant Limji Chaudhari, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), S.No.902, Plot No.138, Nashik Varad, Mumbai-Agra Highway, Chetana Nagar, Nashik-422009 Maharashtra Pan : Adlpc0225H Appellant Respondent

RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the ex parte order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 09.02.2024 for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a Contractor providing services ... circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for remand of the matter to the file of the NFAC for de novo consideration in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal filed

Vikrant Rajendra Bidkar, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(5), Pune

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.708/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 09.02.2024 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, no regular return

Ms Diamond Enterprises, Parbhani vs. ITO Hingoli, Parbhani

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

PANDA, VP : The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 09.02.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18. For the sake of convenience, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, all these relate to the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the penalty of Rs.55,574/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s.271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Ms Diamond Enterprises, Parbhani vs. ITO Hingoli, Parbhani

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

PANDA, VP : The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 09.02.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18. For the sake of convenience, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, all these relate to the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the penalty of Rs.55,574/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s.271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Premadevi Rameshchandra Agrawal, Jalna vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Jalna, Jalna

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.599/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY

Kumar Housing Corporation Private Limited(Previously Kunown As Kul Urban Development Pvt. Ltd), Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2), Pune

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Vinayak Janrao Kolasakar, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Nashik

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18 Vinayak Janrao Kolasakar 1, Godavari Vihar Society, Ramwadi, Panchawati, Nasik-422003. Pan: Aclpk3569R. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Nashik. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Umashankar Prasad [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 23/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2024 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfas/S/250/2023- 24/1057868559(1) Dt. 10/11/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] Passed Which In Turn Confirmed The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Nashik [‘Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2017-18 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter];

ITBA/NFAS/S/250/2023- 24/1057868559(1) dt. 10/11/2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed which in turn confirmed the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Nashik ... assessed the total income at ₹41,83,280/- Aggrieved assessee unsuccessfully contested the former addition in an appeal before Ld. NFAC. 3. Aggrieved by the order of first appellate authority the assessee came in present appeal with a solitary substantive ground as; 1. On the facts and the circumstances

M/S Verstar Technologies LLP, Pune vs. Assistant Comissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1441/Pun/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21

INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 06.11.2023 for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged ... filed on 31.12.2020 declaring Nil income. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessment Unit (NFAC) vide order dated 28.09.2022 at a total income of Rs.3,63,78,090/-. While doing so, the Assessment Unit (NFAC) denied the grant of depreciation on 2 the cost