ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL P. LTD, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

income. (b) The CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition based on his erroneous observations without confronting the appellant with such observations. The addition in the sum of Rs.191,11,60,784/- confirmed by CIT(A) on the basis of conjecture and surmises be deleted in full. 3. (a) The CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance

SOCIEADADE DE FOMENTO INDL. PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

income. (b) The CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition based on his erroneous observations without confronting the appellant with such observations. The addition in the sum of Rs.191,11,60,784/- confirmed by CIT(A) on the basis of conjecture and surmises be deleted in full. 3. (a) The CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance

M/S CHOWGULE AND COMPANY (SALT) PVT. LTD,MORMUGAO vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D made to the taxable income as also the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act. 2) The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not passing a speaking order on the grounds whether addition

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), BELAGAVI vs. SHRI GIRISH PRAKASH VERNEKAR, BELAGAVI

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection by

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Additional income declared towards value of 25,17,500 excess stock found during Survey u/s 133A 2 Disallowance of URD purchases

JENNY ELTON VALES,DONA PAULA vs. ITO, WARD - 5, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

additions were made to the total income which included disallowance of depreciation and addition to house property income. As appellant

JENNY ELTON VALES,DONA PAULA vs. ITO, WARD - 5, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

additions were made to the total income which included disallowance of depreciation and addition to house property income. As appellant

M/S VEEJAY FACILITY MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD,PANAJI vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

addition under section 143(1) (a). 6) The CIT (appeals) has completely ignored the fact that delays in payment of employees’s contribution to PF and ESI were on account of genuine reasons beyond the control of the appellant, that the delays were not Material delays and the amounts were paid well before the due date of filing of income

M/S SADANAND BHAVAN,GOKAK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gd Padmahshalii T A. No.49/Pan/2026 (A.Y. 2013-14) M/S Sadanand Bhavan, The Income Tax Cts No. 3205 Opp. Bus Vs. Office Ward 1, Stand Road Gokak, Gokak, Karnataka -591307. Karnataka-591307. Pan .No.Aapfs8051G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

addition u/sec69&69A of the Act and disallowed excess partner remuneration of partner s and assessed the total income of Rs.76

MR. AGNELO SOCORRO JOAQUIM VIEGAS,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5), PANAJI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 069/Pan/2025 & Sa 06/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Agnelo Socorro Joaquim Viegas H. No. 373, Galliwaddo, Taleigao, Caranzalem, Goa-403002. Pan : Akapv9049C . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Vinesh Pikale [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Sanket Deshmukh[‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1073026397(1) Dt. 07/02/2025 Passed By Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals(2), Ahmedabad [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Sprung Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 27/12/2018 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act By The Income

income (either by way of additions or disallowances as the case may be) that is brought to tax while assessing

BRAGANZA AND FULARI VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MAPUSA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.28/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Braganza & Fulari Ventures Vs. Acit, Private Limited, Circle-2(1), 303-304, 3Rd Floor, Panaji B&F Habitat Building, Canca Parra Bypass, Ximer Bardez, Mapusa, Goa – 403507 Pan : Aaecb3628E Appellant Respondent

addition made in the assessment order and then subjected to penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. From the nature of disallowance, which is disallowance of expenses on the ground that they should have been capitalized, it is manifestly a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income

BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO GOA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

disallowance is to form foundation for resultant addition in computing the deemed income u/s 115JB of the Act. The Ld. Uniyal

ASSTT. COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. INFRASTRUCTURE LOGISTICS PVT. LTD., DONA PAULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 380/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. Pan : Aaaci9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 381/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji-Goa, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

income of the assessee company at Rs.45,08,77,004/- after, inter alia, making the following additions/disallowances: Sl. No. Particulars Amount ( in Rs.) 1. Disallowance u/s.14A of the Act Rs. 15,03,242/- 2. Disallowance of contribution to Temple Rs. 10,89,334/- 3. Disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act Rs. 11,39,867/- 4. Addition

INFRASTRUCTURE LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,DONA PAULA vs. JOINT COMM. OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 1, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 380/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. Pan : Aaaci9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 381/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji-Goa, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

income of the assessee company at Rs.45,08,77,004/- after, inter alia, making the following additions/disallowances: Sl. No. Particulars Amount ( in Rs.) 1. Disallowance u/s.14A of the Act Rs. 15,03,242/- 2. Disallowance of contribution to Temple Rs. 10,89,334/- 3. Disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act Rs. 11,39,867/- 4. Addition

GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,PANAJI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), PANAJI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A.No.344/Pan/2017 (A.Y.2013-14 ) Guala Closures(India) Vs. I T O Ward1(1), Private Limited, Aaykar Bhavan, D-1, Sesa Ghor, Edc, Patto, 20,Edc Complex, Panjim-403001. Patto, Goa. Panaji-403001, Goa Pan/Gir No.:Aaacg4447J Appellant .. Respondent

additional tax on dividend is thus clearly covered by subject as embraced by Entry 82 ". Once the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that dividend connotes ' income ', the natural corollary is that as per section 4, the said income should be chargeable to tax in the hands of the person earning such income. However, from a combined reading of Section

SOCIAL CLUB AND KREEDA BHAVAN,BELGAVI vs. ITO, WARD - 2(1), BELGAVI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am Social Club & Kreeda Bhavan, Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Belagavi College Road, Belagavi-590002 Pan No.Aacas 6996 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B.B.Chandargi, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/10/2021 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Gulbarga, Dated 19.10.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013- 2013, On The Following Grounds :- 1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Belgaum Has Erred In Upholding The Order Assessing Officer Disallowing Expenses Under The Head Business Or Profession Even Though Income Is Exempted As Mutual Concern By The Assessing Officer. This Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case.

Income from other sources and not under the head Business or profession for the AY 2013-14, but the Assessing Officer has disallowed the expenses u/s 40(i)(a) & 43B of the Act. Therefore, it was submitted by the ld.AR of the assessee that the addition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI, GOA vs. BAGKIYA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD, GOA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed in aforestated terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2017-2018 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S M/S Bagkiya Construction Pvt. Ltd. Sf-3, Building No.-3. Techno Cidade, Chogam Rd., Alto Porvorim, Goa-403521. Pan: Aaccb9382M . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: None For The Respondent Revenue By: Mr Senthil Kumar [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Revenue’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(2) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges The Order Dt. 29/05/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals-2), Panaji [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Wheeled From The Order Dt. 25/08/2021 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act By Acit, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2017-18.[‘Ay’]

additional income during the course of search & seizure and survey operation which for the benefit of adjudication is as reproduced herein as; “In pursuance of the Finance Minister's budget speech dated 28-2-2003 this instruction was issued by the CBDT and is as under: ‘Instances have come to the notice of the Board where assessees have claimed that

M/S CHOWGULE REAL ESTATE & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,PANAJI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.03/Pan/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Chowgule Real Estate & Construction Company Private Limited, Office No.311, 1St Floor, Casa Del Sol, Opp. Marriot Hotel, Miramar, Panaji- Goa- 403001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaacc6040M बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-2, ……""यथ" / Respondent Margao. Assessee By : Shri Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Panaji. (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 09.10.2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Private Limited Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Property Developers Etc. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Was Filed On 29.09.2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.36,51,117/- & Also Offered To Book Profits To Tax U/S 115Jb Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Of Rs.2,23,62,741/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa (‘The Assessing Officer’) Vide Order Dated

income of Rs.1,28,95,293/- under the normal provisions of the I.T. Act after making disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of Rs.2,06,718/- and also making additions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI vs. M/S NIRANI SUGARS LIMITED, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

addition of Rs.33,79,24,000/- as depreciation on plants and machinery. 6.1. During the hearing proceedings AR of the Appellant submitted that the disallowance of depreciation for assessment order for the A.Y.2009-10 & 2010- 11 was subject matter of appeal before the Hon'ble Income

HARDESH ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,MARGAO vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, MARGAO

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Hardesh Ores Private Deputy Commissioner Of Limited Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Villa Flores Da Silva, Vs. Margao, Goa. Erasmo Carvalho Street, Margao, Goa-403601. (Pan: Aaach4515J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Nishant Thakkar, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1 Vide

disallowance made by the AO under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the income Tax Rules, 1962 amounting to Rs.2,64,195/-. The whole of the addition