BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

28 results for “disallowance”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,900Delhi2,315Kolkata1,841Chennai870Bangalore784Ahmedabad734Pune507Jaipur340Hyderabad315Raipur309Chandigarh275Surat273Rajkot217Indore144Visakhapatnam140Nagpur139Amritsar118Karnataka113Cuttack108Lucknow101Cochin97Guwahati75Ranchi51Patna47Calcutta44SC28Panaji28Allahabad26Jodhpur25Agra18Varanasi17Jabalpur15Telangana15Kerala9Dehradun8Orissa4Himachal Pradesh3Rajasthan2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 14A31Section 143(3)25Section 271C25Addition to Income20Disallowance19Section 36(1)(va)14Deduction14Section 25013Section 26311Section 143(1)

COMMUNIDADE OF CHICALIM,CHICALIM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI

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

ITA 207/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.207/Pan/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17 ) Comunidade Of Chicalim, Vs Acit Circle 2(1), Ground Floor, St Xavier Aaykar Bhavan, . Church Building, Edc, Patto, Chicalim-403802, Panjim South Goa,Goa. Goa-403001. Pan .No. Aaaabc0196P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 139(5)Section 57Section 74

carry forward losses and (ii) disallowance of claim of deduction u/sec57(iv) of the Act pertaining to the interest income

M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 20110
TDS8
ITA 450/PAN/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed
ITAT Panaji
29 Aug 2022
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Ahiliabai Sardessai Assistant Commissioner Of 301, Lotus Court, M. G. Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Vs. Road, St. Inwz Junction, Panaji. Panaji, Goa-403001. (Pan: Aagfa9044G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, Ar Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 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 Ita No. Cit(A), Pnj-1/10391/2017-18 Dated 14.09.2018 For A.Y. 2015-16 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Acit, Circle-1(1), Panaji, Goa Dated 13.12.2017. 2. Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri N. J. Prabhudesai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

carried forward loss of Rs.60,473/-. During the year under assessment, Ld. AO noted that assessee has received dividend income of Rs.42,77,266/- which is claimed as exempt u/s. 10(34) of the Act and against which assessee has not disallowed

M/S SOVA,PANAJI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 24/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2018-19 M/S Sova Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aacfs8862Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 263Section 56

carried forward [‘C/f’] of total losses of ₹44,90,40,717/- of which current year business losses including unabsorbed depreciation of ₹3,21,300/- were ₹27,38,53,538/-. The return of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dt. 22/09/2019 and the consequential assessment

VIRUPAXAPPA SIDRAMAPPA BEMBALGI,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BELGAVU

ITA 11/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji08 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 011/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S Virupakaxappa Sidramappa Bembalgi 580, Saraf Katta, Shahapur, Belgaum-590003. Pan : Aadfv3936F . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr A S Patil [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

carried forward loss & deduction u/c VI-A of the Act etc. The case of the appellant was selected u/s 143(2) of the Act primarily to scrutinise impact of tax auditor’s ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 18 M/s Virupakaxappa Sidramappa Bembalgi Vs ITO, Belgaum ITA Nos.011/PAN/2025 AY: 2017-18 comment/reporting made against ‘clause 13(e)’ of Form

ZUARI MANAGEMENT SERVICES LTD.,GOA vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1, MARGAO

ITA 85/PAN/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2009-10 M/S Zuari Management Services Ltd. (Erstwhile Zuari Infrastructure & Developers Ltd., Formerly Zuari Sez Ltd.) Jai Kisaan Nagar, Zuari Nagar, Goa. Pan: Aaacz2903Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Salil Kapoor [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr Senthil Kumar N [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-

For Appellant: Mr Salil Kapoor [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Senthil Kumar N [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 263Section 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

carry forward [‘c/f’] of business loss [‘BL’] of ₹3,61,09,708/- and long-term capital loss [‘LTCL’] of ₹46,51,437/-. Subsequent to processing of said return summarily u/s 143(1) of the Act, the case of the assessee vide notice dt. 28/12/2011 was selected for scrutiny and an assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed whereby

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

ITA 390/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Ms Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 10(35)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

loss account, then only the provisions of section 115JB of the Act would apply. lex lata, the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act is a notional disallowance and therefore, by taking recourse to section 14A of the Act, the amount cannot be added back to book profit under clause (f) of section 115JB of the Act, and same can find

PRIME MINERAL EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH FOMENTO RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED),PANAJI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 1, PANAJI

The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 3/PAN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji05 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 003/Pan/2023 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Prime Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd. (Now Amalgamated With Fomento Resources Pvt. Ltd.) 102, 1St Fl. Kamat Metropolis-1, Behind Caculo Mall, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa-403001. . . . . . . .Appellant Pan : Aadcp1647E V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . Respondent Range-1, Panaji, Goa

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M. Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 41(1)Section 4I

carrying out the disallowance, therefore found no merit in the contentions & relevant ground of the appeal. ITAT-Panaji Page 23 of 42 Prime Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd.(Now Amalgamated with Fomento Resources Pvt. Ltd.) Vs JCIT, Panaji ITA Nos.003/PAN/2023 AY: 2009-10 5.21 Now coming to alternate plea of the appellant for considering only such investment which yielded exempt income

M/S DEMPO RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji15 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dempo Resorts Acit, Circle-2, Margao Private Limited Empressa Dempo, Mala Vs. Fontainhas, Panaji, Goa – 403 001. Pan: Aaccd 2126 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Naik, Accountant Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 2, Panaji In Ita No. 390/Cit(A)/Pnj-1/2014-15 Re-Numbered As Ita No. 342/Cit(A)-2/Pnj/2017-18 Dated 23.01.2018 Against The Order Passed By Acit, Circle-1(1), Panaji U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 29.12.2014. 2. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee In The Present Appeal Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Naik, AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

disallow the claim of these expenses u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, the total loss was assessed at Rs. 43,60,000/- which was allowed to be carry forward

JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, PANAJI vs. M/S WALLACE PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD, PANAJI

ITA 290/PAN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri P.R.V RaghavanFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

disallowing the assessee’s foreign exchange losses of Rs.5,08,39,412/-. The CIT(A)'s findings extracted in preceding paragraphs stand upheld therefore. The Revenue fails in its first and former appeal ITA.No.289/PAN./2019. 5. The outcome would be hardly any different in Revenue’s latter appeal ITA.No.290/PAN./2019 involving sec.271(1)(c) penalty issue of Rs.3

JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, PANAJI vs. M/S WALLACE PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD, PANAJI

ITA 289/PAN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri P.R.V RaghavanFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

disallowing the assessee’s foreign exchange losses of Rs.5,08,39,412/-. The CIT(A)'s findings extracted in preceding paragraphs stand upheld therefore. The Revenue fails in its first and former appeal ITA.No.289/PAN./2019. 5. The outcome would be hardly any different in Revenue’s latter appeal ITA.No.290/PAN./2019 involving sec.271(1)(c) penalty issue of Rs.3

MUKTAR AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,VERNA vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU

ITA 47/PAN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 41/Pan/2021 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Goa Electronics Ltd., Ground Floor, Sharma Shakti Bhavan, Edc Complex, Patto, Panaji, Goa – 403 001 . . . . . . . अपीलाथी / Appellant Pan:Aaacg7029G

For Appellant: Adv. Ms Eesha Dukle forFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

forward losses at (-) ₹60,90,693/-. 3.2 The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 07/08/2020 with an addition u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act thus determined the total income at ₹13,15,486/-, vide intimation dt. 19/10/2019. While doing so, the AO made a disallowance

GOA ELECTRONICS LIMITED,PANAJI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

ITA 41/PAN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 41/Pan/2021 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Goa Electronics Ltd., Ground Floor, Sharma Shakti Bhavan, Edc Complex, Patto, Panaji, Goa – 403 001 . . . . . . . अपीलाथी / Appellant Pan:Aaacg7029G

For Appellant: Adv. Ms Eesha Dukle forFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

forward losses at (-) ₹60,90,693/-. 3.2 The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 07/08/2020 with an addition u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act thus determined the total income at ₹13,15,486/-, vide intimation dt. 19/10/2019. While doing so, the AO made a disallowance

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI vs. M/S MILROC GOOD EARTH PROPERTY AND DEVELOPERS LLP, PANAJI

In the result, cross-objection filed by the assessee in CO No

ITA 26/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 26/Pan/2018 ""या"ेपसं./Co.No.06/Pan/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.26/Pan/2018) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Panaji, Goa .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Milroc Good Earth Property & Developers Llp, 501, 5Th Floor Milroc Lar Menezes, S.V. Road, Panaji-Goa - 403001 Pan : Aaacg7222M ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preethi Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

carried the matter in appeal before us. 6. At the very outset of hearing of the appeal the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘DR’), submitted, that the CIT(Appeals) had gravely erred in vacating the disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of interest paid on bank OD of Rs.1,61,56,414/-. It was submitted

BEIERSDORF INDIA (P) LTD.,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4),, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 337/PAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh D.E. Robinson, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 28Section 36Section 43Section 43(5)

loss, the assessee has written off 50% of total dues which should be allowed. Since the assets of defaulters are attached and the assessee feel that it would be able to recover only 50% of total dues, therefore, remaining 50% has been written-off as bad debts in its books of account which is allowable under section

M/S AHILIABAI SARDESSAI,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 379/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 378 & 379/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Ahilibai Sardessai 301, Lotus Court, M.G. Road, St. Inez Junction, Panaji-Goa-403 001 Pan : Aagfa9044G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji-Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri D.E. Robinson, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :22.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

loss account of the firm. 4. For these and such other reasons that may be urged at the time of hearing it is prayed that the disallowances be set aside in entirety and the order of CIT(Appeals) be modified accordingly. 5. The appellant prays leave to add, to alter and amend any of the above grounds of appeal

M/S AHILIABAI SARDESSAI,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 378/PAN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 378 & 379/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Ahilibai Sardessai 301, Lotus Court, M.G. Road, St. Inez Junction, Panaji-Goa-403 001 Pan : Aagfa9044G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji-Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri D.E. Robinson, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :22.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

loss account of the firm. 4. For these and such other reasons that may be urged at the time of hearing it is prayed that the disallowances be set aside in entirety and the order of CIT(Appeals) be modified accordingly. 5. The appellant prays leave to add, to alter and amend any of the above grounds of appeal

M/S R. S. SHETYE & BROS,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), PANAJI

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

ITA 37/PAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.37/Pan/2023 (A.Y.2016-17) R.S.Shetye & Bros, Vs Acit 1(1), Flat.No.14, 1 St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Trionara Apartments, Edc, Patto, New Muncipal Market, Panjim Panaji- Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan .No.Aabfr9785N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 3

Loss A/c prepared for the respective years which were also subjected to audit under both the provisions of Companies Act, 1956/2013 and u/s 44AB of the Act as well. Out of these three payments, later sequential two payments pertaining to; (a) expenses/charges etc., paid for registration of second mining-lease renewal, & (b) periodic royalty payments etc., paid on the basis

M/S PRATEEK ALLOYS PVT. LTD.,PANAJI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 279/PAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 75/Pan/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Shrinivas Nayak, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 250(6)

carried out on assessee on 03.06.2015. During the assessment year 2015-16, the assessee has entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with M/s Vedarambh Property LLP dated 16.01.2015 towards liasoning, assisting & negotiating and getting surrendered of all rights so created due to negotiations in the land consisted of clearing the tenants and organizing and ensuring vacant and peaceful possession

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI vs. PRATEEK ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED, PANAJI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 75/PAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 75/Pan/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Shrinivas Nayak, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 250(6)

carried out on assessee on 03.06.2015. During the assessment year 2015-16, the assessee has entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with M/s Vedarambh Property LLP dated 16.01.2015 towards liasoning, assisting & negotiating and getting surrendered of all rights so created due to negotiations in the land consisted of clearing the tenants and organizing and ensuring vacant and peaceful possession

EID PARRY (INDIA) LTD.,BELAGAVI vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS RANGE, PANAJI, PANAJI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in term of aforesaid observation

ITA 37/PAN/2019[2013/14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 35 To 40/Pan/2019 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-2012 To 2016-2017 M/S Eid Parry India Limited Khanpet, Trogal,Tal. : Ramdurg, Dist. : Belagavi, Karnataka Pan: Aaace 0702 C Tan:Blre 08509 E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Ward-1, Belagavi, Dist. : Belagavi, Karnataka . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Philip George Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; These Present Appeals Filed By The Appellant Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Belagavi [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Ascended Out Of Orders Of The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Tds Range, Panaji [For Short “Ao”] Passed U/S 271C Of The Act, For Six Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-2012 To 2016-2017. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 18

For Appellant: Mr Philip GeorgeFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 194CSection 250Section 271C

Loss account of the company as expenditure in the nature of services and same is booked as part of cost of raw material. No tax is deductible on the agricultural income as the harvesting charges paid to harvesting contractor are in the nature of agricultural income in the hands of recipients and Harvesting charges are included in the value