BASHCO ENGINEERING PVT.LTD,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (TDS),, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.894/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Bashco Engineering Pvt. Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. Ltd., Plot No. E-19, Midc Kupwad, Sangli- 416436. Pan : Aabcb1679A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing : 19.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.05.2022 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, Kolhapur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 04.04.2019 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming Interest Liability U/S 206C(7) Of Rs. 28127/-. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate The Fact That When The Tcs Demand Is Nullified In Favour Of Assessee, Interest Liability On The Same Under 206C(7) Does Not Arises. 3. The Interest Demand Raised May Please Be Deleted.

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on 13.02.2009. During the course of survey proceedings, it was found that the appellant company had sold scrap of Rs.98,35,715/- and Rs.12,95,840/- during the financial years 2007-08 and 2008-09 respectively without collection of tax deducted at source as provided u/s 206C of the Act. Accordingly

VIJAY TUKARAM RAUNDAL,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

133A of the\npaper book, is 30-03-2013. The assessee lodged a claim before the Tribunal that\nthough the completion certificate was issued on this date, but the project was\nactually completed on 7-03-2012, when it intimated about the completion of\nconstruction to the District Collector, Pune vide its letter, a copy placed at page\n215

M/S P.N. GADGIL & SONS,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 6, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1921/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. P. N. Gadgil & Sons, Vs. Dcit, Circle-6, Pune. Abhiruchi Mall, 4Th Floor, 59C Sinhagad Road, Pune- 411041. Pan : Aanfp4476C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri M. R. Bhagwat Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 15.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 02.08.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Learned Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Erred In Confirming Penalty Of Rs.23,20,000/- Levied Under Section 272B(2). 2) The Learned Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Erred In Sustaining The Penalty At Rs.23,20,000/- When There Was Only One Default & As Such Penalty Could At The Must Be Sustained At Rs.10,000/- Only. 3) The Learned Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Erred In Sustaining The Penalty Even Though There Was A Reasonable Cause For Assessee'S Failure To Obtain Pan Of Its Retail Customers. 4) The Penalty Levied Be Cancelled Or Reduced To Rs. 10,000/-.

133A of the I T Act, I am of the opinion that no interference is required in the penalty order. Hence 4 the penalty of Rs. 23,20,000/- is upheld. All the grounds raised in this appeal are dismissed.” 5. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. AR appearing from

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

TDS. 5. The proceedings u/s 154 of the Act were initiated vide notice dated 05/04/2023 proposing to treat the abovementioned 9 income offered as taxable under section 69C and thereby to tax the same under section 115BBE instead of normal tax rate applicable to companies. 6. However, the said proceedings were dropped vide order dated 08/02/2024 considering the fact that

VIJAY TUKARAM RAUNDAL,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

133A of the paper book, is 30-03-2013. The assessee lodged a claim before the Tribunal that though the completion certificate was issued on this date, but the project was actually completed on 7-03-2012, when it intimated about the completion of construction to the District Collector, Pune vide its letter, a copy placed at page

VIJAY TUKARAM RAUNDAL,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

133A of the paper book, is 30-03-2013. The assessee lodged a claim before the Tribunal that though the completion certificate was issued on this date, but the project was actually completed on 7-03-2012, when it intimated about the completion of construction to the District Collector, Pune vide its letter, a copy placed at page

VIJAY TUKARAM RAUNDAL,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

133A of the paper book, is 30-03-2013. The assessee lodged a claim before the Tribunal that though the completion certificate was issued on this date, but the project was actually completed on 7-03-2012, when it intimated about the completion of construction to the District Collector, Pune vide its letter, a copy placed at page

SUBHASH KHUSHALCHAND SHAH,,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (TDS),, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.685/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Dilip Khushalchand Shah Vs. Ito (Tds), Prop. Of Ramsina Metal Corporation, Kolhapur 1-401, C Ward, Laxmipuri, Kolhapur-416002 Pan: Aekps0058L Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.686/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Subhash Khushalchand Shah Vs. Ito (Tds), Prop. Of Pradip Metals, Kolhapur Shop No.53, Kotitirth Market, Kolhapur-416002 Pan: Adnps2453B Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.687/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Pradip Khushalchand Shah Vs. Ito (Tds), Prop. Of M/S. Sha Khushalchand Kolhapur Vanechand & Sons, 1399-C, Kolhapur-416002 Pan: Adnps2457F Appellant Respondent

TDS), Prop. of M/s. Sha Khushalchand Kolhapur Vanechand & Sons, 1399-C, Kolhapur-416002 PAN: ADNPS2457F Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri M.K. Kulkarni Revenue by Shri Sudhedu Das Date of hearing 01-07-2021 Date of pronouncement 02-07-2021 Dilip K. Shah & two Ors आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by the related but different assessees arise from

DILIP KHUSHALCHAND SHAH,,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (TDS),, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.685/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Dilip Khushalchand Shah Vs. Ito (Tds), Prop. Of Ramsina Metal Corporation, Kolhapur 1-401, C Ward, Laxmipuri, Kolhapur-416002 Pan: Aekps0058L Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.686/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Subhash Khushalchand Shah Vs. Ito (Tds), Prop. Of Pradip Metals, Kolhapur Shop No.53, Kotitirth Market, Kolhapur-416002 Pan: Adnps2453B Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.687/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Shri Pradip Khushalchand Shah Vs. Ito (Tds), Prop. Of M/S. Sha Khushalchand Kolhapur Vanechand & Sons, 1399-C, Kolhapur-416002 Pan: Adnps2457F Appellant Respondent

TDS), Prop. of M/s. Sha Khushalchand Kolhapur Vanechand & Sons, 1399-C, Kolhapur-416002 PAN: ADNPS2457F Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri M.K. Kulkarni Revenue by Shri Sudhedu Das Date of hearing 01-07-2021 Date of pronouncement 02-07-2021 Dilip K. Shah & two Ors आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by the related but different assessees arise from

CPI GERA REALTY INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE

The appeals of the assessee are DISMISSED

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.64 & 65/Pun/2023 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2015-16 Gera Reality India Pvt. Ltd., 200, Gera Plaza, Boat Club Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aaccg6818R . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनधम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(3), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. K. Tyagi & Ramesh Soniminde Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By The Present Twin Appeals, The Assessee Challenges The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 11, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/12/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”].

133A of the Act were conducted at the registered office and site offices of the appellant company on 11/9/2014. 3.2 Pursuant to aforestated action, consequential assessments u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A of the Act in the case of the appellant were completed for ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 10 Gera Reality India Pvt. Ltd., ITA No 64 &65/PUN/2023

CPI GERA REALTY INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE

The appeals of the assessee are DISMISSED

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.64 & 65/Pun/2023 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2015-16 Gera Reality India Pvt. Ltd., 200, Gera Plaza, Boat Club Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aaccg6818R . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनधम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(3), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. K. Tyagi & Ramesh Soniminde Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By The Present Twin Appeals, The Assessee Challenges The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 11, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/12/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”].

133A of the Act were conducted at the registered office and site offices of the appellant company on 11/9/2014. 3.2 Pursuant to aforestated action, consequential assessments u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A of the Act in the case of the appellant were completed for ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 10 Gera Reality India Pvt. Ltd., ITA No 64 &65/PUN/2023

SANTOSH ASHOKRAO BARHANPURKAR,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), NASHIK

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

TDS deducted by employer. The assessee was the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from technical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax & therefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant, who without informing him & others, claimed excess deduction under chapter VI-A of the IT Act & claimed refund. It was Kishor Patil who cheated

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5 PUNE, PUNE vs. DIPTI NARENDRA LULLA, PUNE

TDS\nwas not deducted for some persons / parties. The assessee has not furnished the\ncopy of Form 15G. Further, the assessee also could not substantiate with evidence\nto his satisfaction regarding the creditworthiness of persons / parties from whom\nsuch loans were taken. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made addition\nof Rs.5,16,85,602/- to the total

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. DHANANJAY BABRUVAN KENDER, BEED

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20 Dcit, Aurangabad Dhananjay Babruvan Kender Bunglow No.69, Yogeshwari Nagari Vs. Ring Road, Ambajogai, Beed – 431517 Pan: Bwlpk1384D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 27-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-12-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was initiated by the DDIT (Inv), Aurangabad at the office cum residential premises of the assessee at Bungalow No.69, Yogeshwari Nagari, Ring Road, Ambajogai on 14.02.2020. During the course of survey action, cash of Rs.19,31,860/- was found at the premises of the assessee. The assessee

PRASHANT BALASAHEB KAGE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

TDS deducted by employer. The assessee was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return filed by Kishor Patil & truly believed that the returns are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from technical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax & therefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant

SANTOSH ASHOKRAO BARHANPURKAR,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), NASHIK

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

TDS deducted by employer. The assessee was\nunaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return filed by\nKishor Patil & truly believed that the returns are filed legally as per\nthe provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from\ntechnical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax &\ntherefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant

RAJENDRA SHIVAJI THETE,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 2(1), NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2431/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Rajendra Shivaji Thete, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Nashik. Shivanjali, Plot No.25, H.No.4669, Shivaji Nagar, Ozar Mig, Nashik- 422206. Pan : Abwpt0060C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai : 09.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.09.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Is Not Justified In Levying Penalty U/S 270A Of Rs. 1,49,704/- On The Ground That The Assesse Had Under Reporting Of Income In Consequence Of Misreporting Of Income. In Consequence Of Misreporting Without Appreciating That The Said Levy Of Penalty Was Not Justified In Law.

TDS deducted by employer. The assessee was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return filed by Kishor Patil & truly believed that the returns are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from technical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax & therefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant

SANTOSH ASHOKRAO BARHANPURKAR,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2140/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Santosh Ashokrao Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Nashik. Barhanpurkar, Flat No.B-8, Deepali Appt., Near Bus Stop Mahatmangar, Nashik- 422007. Pan : Aawpb8671N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Is Not Justified In Levying Penalty U/S 270A Of Rs. 1,15,938/- On The Ground That The Assesse Had Under-Reported As A Consequence Of Misreporting Of Income Without Appreciating That The Said Levy Of Penalty Was Not Justified In Law.

TDS deducted by employer. The assessee was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return filed by Kishor Patil & truly believed that the returns are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from technical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax & therefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant