DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

142(1) of the Act. During the years\nunder consideration, Assessee had entered into various\ninternational transactions with its Associated Enterprise(s) in\nthe course of its business. Assessee had paid royalty\namounting to Rs.54,30,69,318/-for A.Y.2015-2016,\nRs.46,99,15,361/- for A.Y.2016-2017 and Rs.51,26,51,778/-\nfor A.Y. 2017-2018 to its Associated Enterprise

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

142(1) of the Act. During the years\nunder consideration, Assessee had entered into various\ninternational transactions with its Associated Enterprise(s) in\nthe course of its business. Assessee had paid royalty\namounting to Rs.54,30,69,318/-for A.Y.2015-2016,\nRs.46,99,15,361/- for A.Y.2016-2017 and Rs.51,26,51,778/-\nfor A.Y. 2017-2018 to its Associated Enterprise

M/S. SHARADA PAPER COMPANY,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (4),, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1547/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S.Sharada Paper Company, The Income Tax Officer, 436/8, Narayan Peth, Vs Ward-11(4), Pune. Maharashtra – 411030. Pan: Aaffs 1470 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-8, Pune For The Assessment Year 2007-08 Dated 18.07.2019 Arising Out Of Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 25.03.2013. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal -8) Has Erred In Confirming The Withdrawal Of Claim For The Carry Forward Of Loss For A.Y. 2003-04, A.Y. 2004-05, A.Y.2005-06 & A.Y.2006- 07 Without Verifying The Facts. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal -8) Has Erred In Confirming The Rectification Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 154 & Thereby Withdrawing Loss Allowed In The Assessment Made Under Section 143(3) Of Income Taxact,1961 Without Appreciating The Fact That This Is Not Mistake Apparent From Records & Hence Cannot Be Rectified Under 154 Of The Act.

142(1) to which the assessee complied with. The AO ITA No.1547/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2007-08 M/s. Sharada Paper Company Vs. ITO, Ward-11(4), Pune[A] accepted the returned income. However, the AO passed rectification order on 25.03.2013 under section 154 of the Act stating that the return of income for A.Y.2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 were

DILIP HIRALAL CHAUDHARI,NANDURBAR vs. ITO, WARD, DHULE

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

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

142(1) of the IT Act, return of income was filed disclosing income of Rs.6,82,013/- & claiming refund of Rs.28,740/- after adjusting income tax of Rs.32,406/- from the total TCS of Rs.61,149/-. TCS was collected on liquor purchased by the assessee during the course of business of running permit room & beer Bar. It was further clarified

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

142 taxmann.com 274 (Bangalore\n-Trib.) held that amendment in Section 32(1) by Finance Act, 2021 to\nthe effect that no depreciation was allowable on goodwill would take\neffect from 01/04/2021 and would be applicable from assessment\nyear 2021-22 and subsequent years.\n28. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the present\ncase, legal position

VIJAY VYANKATRAO MANE,SADASHIV PEATH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER , ADDL/JCIT(A)- CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

TDS compliance and making the disallowance u/s 40A(i)(a) at the processing 4 stage of the return, as such adjustment is not envisaged in the provisions of law and same is also not within the power of Ld. CIT(A), therefore such observation may kindly be deleted and the proportionate addition may kindly be deleted. Your appellant prays

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK vs. CHAKRADHAR CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JALGAON

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

TDS & Disallowance for such default (iii) Refund claim (iv) Unsecured loan 2.1. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued statutory notices u/sec.143(2) and 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, in response to which, the Authorised Representative of the Assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer from time to time and filed the requisite details. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment determining

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK vs. CHAKRAHAR CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JALGAON

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

TDS & Disallowance for such default (iii) Refund claim (iv) Unsecured loan 2.1. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued statutory notices u/sec.143(2) and 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, in response to which, the Authorised Representative of the Assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer from time to time and filed the requisite details. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment determining

BANK OF MAHARASHRA,PUNE vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

142(1) of the Act was also issued and served on the assessee, in response to which the AR of the assessee filed the requisite details from time to time. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under the E-assessment Scheme, 2019 on the following issues: S. No. Issues i. Claim of Any other Amount Allowable as Deduction

M/S KIRAN SANRAN ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

142(1) of the Act dated 25.01.2021, copy of which is placed at pages 31 to 41 of the paper book had 6 asked the assessee to provide the details of sale of Rs.4,67,15,104/- with value as per stamp duty valuation. He submitted that the assessee vide letter dated 23.02.2021, copy of which is placed at pages

PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT LTD ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) were issued and served upon the assessee. 3.1 A reference was made to the Transfer Pricing Officer (“TPO”) u/s 92CA(1) of the Act to determine the Arm’s Length Price of the international transactions entered into by the assessee with its Associate Enterprises during the relevant AY. Pursuant thereto

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. HEMANT BAGAREDDY MOTADOO, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14

142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the requisite details from time to time. 2 3. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee failed to make the payment of tax deducted at source and the tax auditor in the audit report

PARVATI STEEL RE ROLLING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC-2, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) and thereafter issued notice u/s 148 2 on 31.03.2021. The notice was duly served upon the registered e-mail of the assessee. However, no return of income in response to the said notice was filed. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 142(1

PRAFULLA SHANTILAL KOTHARI ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.922/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prafulla Shantilal Kothari, Vs. Acit, Circle-7, Pune. Flat No.1, Akshay Plaza, Ramnagar, Wadgaonsheri, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aahhp4593E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora, Shri Saukhya Lakade & Miss Riya Oswal Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 30.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per R. K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.02.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Visakhapatnam [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Huf & Is Carrying On Business Of Online Trading In Lottery Tickets Under The Name & Style ‘J.K. Lottery’. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 24.10.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.51,25,350/-. The Case

142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee, in response to which, the assessee filed certain details. 3. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs.63,72,633/- on account of salary paid by it. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish complete details

BANSILAL RAMNATH AGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust Cit (Exemption), 251, Budhwar Peth, City Post Chowk, Vs. Pune Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaatb4383K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-01-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, V.P:

142(1) of the Act dated 04.01.2022, copy of which is placed at pages 54 to 57 of the paper book, the Assessing Officer has asked the assessee to give the following details: 24 41. We find vide show cause notice dated 12.02.2022 issued by the Assessing Officer, copy of which is placed at pages

DCIT, CIRCLE 8 PUNE, PUNE vs. ALFA LAVAL INDIA PVT LTD, PUNE

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

section 36(1)(va) of the Act.\nSubsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the following\nreasons:\n“1.\nDeemed International Transactions\n2.\nLarge value of international transactions\n3.\nTransactions with Company whose Registration has been Cancelled by\nMCA\n4.\nDuty Drawback\n5.\nLower amount disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) in ITR (Part A-OI) in comparison

SATISH VISHNU THOMBARE, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. VARSHA PRAFULLA ZENDE, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1656/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Satish Vishnu Thombare, Varsha Prafulla Zende, Income Tax Officer, Prop Of Bleach Chem Enterprises, Ward-1, Ahmednagar Vs. Industrial Estate, Shrirampur, Maharashtra-413709 Pan : Aabpz2541C अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Miss Shivani Shah (Virtual) Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 Date Of 29-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

142(1) of the Act requesting Petitioner to attend his office on 16/10/2019 at 11.00 a.m. Petitioner, vide order dated 15/10/2019, informed Respondent No.1 that the objections against the reopening notice have not been disposed of. On 29/11/2019, Respondent No.1 passed the order of disposing of objections holding that notice under Section 147 is based on tangible material. 8. Petitioner

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 10(20) w.e.f. assessment year 2003-04. Hence, the income of the assessee became taxable. The assessee filed its return of income as a ‘local authority’ claiming no exemption u/s 10(20) for assessment year 2003-04 on 29.10.2003 declaring total loss of Rs.203,32,82,489/- and claiming refund of Rs.78,66,489/- on account of excess TDS