ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

additional income. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same should be allowed. In response thereto, the assessee pointed out that the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act was made in the original return of income by way of Note, wherein it was reported that the assessee was going to claim the deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

additional income. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same should be allowed. In response thereto, the assessee pointed out that the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act was made in the original return of income by way of Note, wherein it was reported that the assessee was going to claim the deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

additional income. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same should be allowed. In response thereto, the assessee pointed out that the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act was made in the original return of income by way of Note, wherein it was reported that the assessee was going to claim the deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

additional income. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same should be allowed. In response thereto, the assessee pointed out that the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act was made in the original return of income by way of Note, wherein it was reported that the assessee was going to claim the deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

additional income. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same should be allowed. In response thereto, the assessee pointed out that the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act was made in the original return of income by way of Note, wherein it was reported that the assessee was going to claim the deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

additional income. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same should be allowed. In response thereto, the assessee pointed out that the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act was made in the original return of income by way of Note, wherein it was reported that the assessee was going to claim the deduction

SHRI P.M. CHORDIA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07

addition of Rs.32,132/- on account of disallowance of expenditure for failure to deduct and pay the TDS. In assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer noted that the assessee credited an amount of Rs.32,132/- by way of interest on TDS which was deducted in the 21 computation statement while computing the income

SHRI P.M. CHORDIA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07

addition of Rs.32,132/- on account of disallowance of expenditure for failure to deduct and pay the TDS. In assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer noted that the assessee credited an amount of Rs.32,132/- by way of interest on TDS which was deducted in the 21 computation statement while computing the income

SHRI P.M. CHORDIA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07

addition of Rs.32,132/- on account of disallowance of expenditure for failure to deduct and pay the TDS. In assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer noted that the assessee credited an amount of Rs.32,132/- by way of interest on TDS which was deducted in the 21 computation statement while computing the income

DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON vs. S.K. TRANSLINE PVT. LTD.,, JALGAON

In the result, the cross objections are partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

Income Tax (Appeals) in deleting the addition. 4.1 In respect of ground Nos. 2 and 3 relating to disallowances u/s. 40A(2) the ld. DR submitted that the assessee has made payments to the tune of Rs.8,93,130/- on account of freight to the Directors. The assessee has not produced any agreement/document indicating that the assessee company had hired

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR vs. VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

income, as enhanced due to disallowance of employer’s as well as employees’ contribution towards PF/ESIC. 37. In addition to the above, the issue of higher deduction on the enhanced profits has been considered by the CBDT and by their circular No. 37/2016 [F. No. 279/Misc/140/2015/ITJ] dated 02.11.2016 have issued the following instructions: “2. The issue of the claim

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

TDS. Thus, he submits that the appellant had discharged the onus lying upon it in terms of provisions of section 19 IT(SS)A Nos.91 to 96/PUN/2022 IT(SS)A Nos.97 & 98/PUN/2022 68 of the Act. In the circumstances, the AO was not justified in making the addition of unsecured loans. E. As regards, the addition made on account

ANAND CONSTRUWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK -1, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.955/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Anand Construwell Private Vs. Pcit-1, Nashik. Limited, Ramchandra Apartments, Makhmalabad Road, Panchvati, Nashik- 422003. Pan : Aafca7736H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Pcit-1, Nashik [‘Ld. Pcit’] For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Basis Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed U/S. 263 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Nashik May Please Be Quashed. 2. On The Basis Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax Is Not Justified In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 By Holding That Provisions Of Section 69C Are Applicable In The Present Case As The Assessee Was Not Able To Explain The Sources Of Expenditure

income at Rs.7,01,01,766/-after making addition of Rs.41,196/- on account of disallowance of interest on TDS