MAHADEV MALLAPPA ATAR,BELAGAVI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, BELAGAVI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 014/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Mahadev Mallappa Atar Pwd Contractor, Katkol, Ramdurg, Dist. Balgavi-591114 Pan:Abxpa7467P . . . . . . . Appellant

3) disallowance of cash payment of ₹32,000/- made to M/s Nirani Cements and (4) unexplained cash deposits of ₹20,00,000/- added u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the aforestated additions the assessee filed first appeal before Ld. NFAC which came to be dismissed. ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 4 Mahadev Mallappa Atar Vs ITO ITA Nos.14/PAN/2024

SCORPIO IRON LTD,PANAJI vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), PANAJI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

68,545/- based on the order of the AO-TP u/s 92CA of the Income Tax Act'1961, in spite of the fact that the assesse or their AE has not taken any benefit or exemption / deduction under the Income Tax Act. The Id AO(TP) and Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Bangalore, 4) has willfully ignored that the assesee

SHREE AMBEY FORGING PRIVAT LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ITO, WARD - (4), PANAJI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

68,545/- based on the order of the AO-TP u/s 92CA of the Income Tax Act'1961, in spite of the fact that the assesse or their AE has not taken any benefit or exemption / deduction under the Income Tax Act. The Id AO(TP) and Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Bangalore, 4) has willfully ignored that the assesee

SHRI RIYAZULHAQ F PATHAN,BELGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPPANI

The appeal is ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 21/Pan/2019 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Riyazulhaq F Pathan, Near Central Excise Quarter, Nipani Tq. Chikodi, Belagavi -591237 Pan:Ahdpp8150A . . . . . . . अपीलाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nipani . . . . . . .प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri N. Shrikanth सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 10/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12/07/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Belagavi [‘Cit(A)’ In Short] Dt. 30/10/2018 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ In Short] Which In Turn Ascended Out Of The Assessment Order Dt. 28/12/2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nipani [‘Ao’ In Short].

3) of the Act by bringing to tax an excess cash of ₹6,70,475/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 155BBE and excess stock of ₹68,35,590/- u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 4. Challenging the application of provisions of section

M/S KAMAT REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS,,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PANAJI., PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

68,152/-, examined original assessment records only and no fresh material had come in his possession after completion of original assessment u/s 143(3) of I.T. Act. 6 ITA.No.336/PAN./2018 M/s. Kamat Real Estate Developers, Panaji, Goa. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action

MR. MALLIKARJUN APPANNA ITI,GOKAK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

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

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

6 Mallikarjun Appanna ITI v.ITO “3. Later on it came to be noticed that the following issues need action u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (i) During the course of survey under section 133A of the Act, the assessee had declared undisclosed income as under. SI. Undisclosed income Amount No. declared on account of Excess stock

M/S ADITI SCANS PVT. LTD,BIJAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, BIJAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am M/S Aditi Scans Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle-1, Bijapur Shiva Kunja Chalukya Nagar (East) Solapur Road, Vijaypur, Vijaypur Pan No.Aagca 7255 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Prasanth G.S., Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Prabhat Jha, Citdr 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 29.11.2017 For The Assessment Year 2009- 2010, On The Following Grounds :- The Order Of The Learned Cit(A) In So Far As It Is Against The 1. Appellant, Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Natural Justice, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case. The Appellant Denies Itself Liable To Be Assessed On A Total Loss 2. Of Rs. 15,76,829/- As Against The Lossof Rs.75,46,930/- Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. The Authorities Below Erred In Treating The Share Capital Of Rs. 3. 13,75,000/- As Unexplained Money Under Section 68 Of The Act Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. The Order Of The Authorities Below Is Bad In Law As The Amount 4. Of Rs. 13,75,000/- Cannot Be Brought To Tax In The Hands Of The Appellant As The Mandatory Conditions To Invoke Section 68 Of The Act Have Not Been Satisfied Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

3. 13,75,000/- as unexplained money under section 68 of the Act under the facts and circumstances of the case. The order of the authorities below is bad in law as the amount 4. of Rs. 13,75,000/- cannot be brought to tax in the hands of the appellant as the mandatory conditions to invoke section

SRITHIK ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED,GOA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) PANAJI,GOA, PANAJI,GOA

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year: 2016-17 Srithik Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 3, Sanguem Industrial Estate, Sanguem, Goa-403704 Pan : Aaics1765P . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing: 30/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Din & Order No 1068425181(1) Dt. 06/09/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Act Which Originated From Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. [‘Ld. Ao’].

68 of the Act. Aggrieved by aforestated assessment the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. NFAC on 17/01/2019 which was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. 5. Aggrieved assessee came in present appeal on as many as nine grounds, which are since inconsonance with rule 8 of ITAT Rules1963, hence reproduction thereof for adjudication in verbatim is dispensed with. ITAT

THE ATHANI CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,ATHANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BELAGAVI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

3 ITA.No.90/PAN./2023 5. Because, the Assessing Officer made additions wrongly under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, for cash credits based on deposits in bank, without going through the books of accounts maintained by the Appellant. 6

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

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-

section 35D of the Act was allowed for the said AY. 3. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the A.O. has erred on facts and in law in disallowing the interest expenditure amounting to Rs. 3,56,51,678/-u/s 36(1)(iii) r.w.s. 37(1) of the Act, without appreciating that the same

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

section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Further, the investment made in shares of Sesa Goa Ltd., as is evident from the audited books of account is out of surplus money only and no borrowed funds were utilized. The assessee-company purchased 3,38,03,812 equity shares of M/s. Sesa

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

section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Further, the investment made in shares of Sesa Goa Ltd., as is evident from the audited books of account is out of surplus money only and no borrowed funds were utilized. The assessee-company purchased 3,38,03,812 equity shares of M/s. Sesa

SHREE MALLIKARJUN SHIPPING PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

68,15,177/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) r.w.s147 of the Act dated 30.03.2015.\n4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the A.O but has sustained the validity of reassessment proceedings u/sec147

SWAPNIL PRABHAKAR NAIK,KHANDOLA MARCELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(3) PANAJI, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

68 without appreciating the supporting ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 10 Swapnil Prabhakar Naik Vs ITO ITA No.: 121/PAN/2025 AY: 2017-18 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned JCIT(A)-6, Mumbai and AO erred in making additions without appreciating the merits of the case and the relevant documentary evidences submitted in the course

LATE SHRI ANAND ALIAS VISHWANATH MAMANI, THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR SMT. RATNA ANAND MAMANI,BELAGAVI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1 BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.352/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) Late Shri Anand Alias Vs Ito-Ward-1, Vishwanath Mamani Through Feroj Khimjibhai Cpx, . His Legal Heir Smt.Ratna Civil Hospital Road Anand Mamani, Belagavi-590001. 3138/3, Ramapur Site, Karnataka. Saundatti, Belagavi-591126, Karnataka. Pan,No.Avhpm6615P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Sri.Shivananad Halbhavi.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 04.02.2026 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale ,Jm: The Assesse Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Nfac/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Addition Of Unexplained Cash Deposits Under Section 68 Of The Act Made By The Assessing Officer. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assesse Has Filed The Return Of Income For A.Y.2017-18 On 05.08.2017 Disclosing A Total Income Of Rs.11,93,580/- & The Case

section 68 of the Act and made addition of unexplained cash deposits of Rs.28,53,000/- and assessed the total income of Rs.40,46,580/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 05.12.2019. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered

SHRI VEERRANI MALLAMMA URBAN CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD,BELGAVI vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), BELGAVI

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

68,573/- and Rs.26,70,100/- respectively; for the sole reason that Saouhard credit co-operative society is not a cooperative society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act. 3 ITA.No.265/Pan/2019 & ITA.No.18/Pan/2020 Shri Sai Credit Souharda SahakariNiyamit, Chikodi & Shri Veerrani Mallamma Urban Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd., Belgavi. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration

SHRI SAI CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMIT,CHIKODI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPANI

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

68,573/- and Rs.26,70,100/- respectively; for the sole reason that Saouhard credit co-operative society is not a cooperative society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act. 3 ITA.No.265/Pan/2019 & ITA.No.18/Pan/2020 Shri Sai Credit Souharda SahakariNiyamit, Chikodi & Shri Veerrani Mallamma Urban Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd., Belgavi. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration

NASALAPUR MAHILA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,RAIBAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4, BELAGAVI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.185/Pan/2024 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Vs I.T.O Ward-4, Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Civil Hospital Road, . Nasalapur, Belgaum-590001. Chikodi, Karnataka. Belgaum-591213, . Karnataka. Pan .No. Aacan5745N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Chetan Chougle.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr

section 68 of the Act and made addition of unexplained cash credits and assessed the total income of Rs.48,16,818/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2019. 3 ITA. No.185/PAN/2024 Nasalapur Mahila Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas

LAXMI NARCINVA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MARGAO vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, MARGAO

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos.185/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Laxmi Narcinva Urban Vs Ito-Ward-3, Cooperative Credit Society Ltd, Blessings Pioneer . Katkar Guru Ashish Building, Complex, 1 St Floor,Rua Clovis Costa Old Market, Road, Margoa-403601, Margoa-403601, Goa. Goa. Pan .No. Aaajl1003E (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri. Pramod.Y.Vaidya.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09.09.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of Nfac/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That There Is A Delay Of In Filing The Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Tribunal & The Assesse Has Filed The Application & Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay. Whereas, The Facts Mentioned In The Affidavit Are Reasonable & The Ld. Dr Has No Specific Objections.

section 68 of the Act and made addition of unexplained cash credits/ unexplained money and assessed the total income of Rs.36,92,400/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2019. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds