PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

150; (ba) an order of assessment or reassessment under section 153A [except an order passed in pursuance of directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel] or an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA; (bb) an order made under sub-section (3) of section 92CD; (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

150; (ba) an order of assessment or reassessment under section 153A [except an order passed in pursuance of directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel] or an order referred to in sub-section (12) of section 144BA; (bb) an order made under sub-section (3) of section 92CD; (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

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

TDS credit. The assessee also took an additional ground before the CIT(A)-I, Thane for allowance of exemption u/s 11. The CIT(A)-I, Thane rejected the additional ground taken by the assessee and exemption u/s 11 had not been allowed to the assessee. Against ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 the order of the CIT(A), Thane, the assessee preferred

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

TDS credit. The assessee also took an additional ground before the CIT(A)-I, Thane for allowance of exemption u/s 11. The CIT(A)-I, Thane rejected the additional ground taken by the assessee and exemption u/s 11 had not been allowed to the assessee. Against ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 the order of the CIT(A), Thane, the assessee preferred

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

TDS credit. The assessee also took an additional ground before the CIT(A)-I, Thane for allowance of exemption u/s 11. The CIT(A)-I, Thane rejected the additional ground taken by the assessee and exemption u/s 11 had not been allowed to the assessee. Against ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 the order of the CIT(A), Thane, the assessee preferred

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

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

TDS credit. The assessee also took an additional ground before the CIT(A)-I, Thane for allowance of exemption u/s 11. The CIT(A)-I, Thane rejected the additional ground taken by the assessee and exemption u/s 11 had not been allowed to the assessee. Against ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 the order of the CIT(A), Thane, the assessee preferred

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

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

TDS credit. The assessee also took an additional ground before the CIT(A)-I, Thane for allowance of exemption u/s 11. The CIT(A)-I, Thane rejected the additional ground taken by the assessee and exemption u/s 11 had not been allowed to the assessee. Against ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 the order of the CIT(A), Thane, the assessee preferred

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

TDS credit. The assessee also took an additional ground before the CIT(A)-I, Thane for allowance of exemption u/s 11. The CIT(A)-I, Thane rejected the additional ground taken by the assessee and exemption u/s 11 had not been allowed to the assessee. Against ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 the order of the CIT(A), Thane, the assessee preferred

VILAS KISAN PATIL,URAN vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, ITD, PANVEL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2178/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vilas Kisan Patin, V The Assessing Officer, House No.82, Panje, S Assessment Unit, Itd, Uran,Tal.Panvel, Panvel. Dist-Raigad, Maharashtra – 400702. Pan: Ayipp1671N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 29.08.2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Hon. Cit(A) Erred In Upholding Addition Of Rs.1,92,72,028/- Made By Ld. Ao By Relying Upon The Provisions Of Section 56(2)(Viii) R.W.S 57(Iv) R.W.S. 145A(B) Of The I.T.Act, 1961, Not Appreciating That The Said Amount Was Interest Granted U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 & Thus Bore The Character Of Enhanced Compensation On Acquisition Of Agricultural Land Situated At Village Panje, Tal.Uran, Dist. Raigd, Maharashtra & Was Therefore Exempt From Tax & The Addition Is Required To Be Deleted. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Later, Amend And/Or Vary The Grounds Of The Appeal At Any Time Before The Decision Of The Appeal.” Submission Of Ld.Ar : 2. Ld.Ar For The Assessee Filed A Paper Book Containing 54 Pages. Ld.Ar Filed A Written Submission. Ld.Ar Submitted That Assessee Had Received Rs.3,85,44,057/- As Interest Under Section 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act. Ld.Ar Submitted That Said Interest Is Not Taxable As Held By The Hon’Ble Bombay High Court. Ld.Ar Filed Copy Of The Judgment. Ld.Ar Also Relied On The Following

2. Ld.AR for the Assessee filed a paper book containing 54 pages. Ld.AR filed a written submission. Ld.AR submitted that assessee had received Rs.3,85,44,057/- as Interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. Ld.AR submitted that said interest is not taxable as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Ld.AR filed copy of the Judgment

MRS. SNEHAL SAMEER BHUJBAL,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 13(2), PUNE, PUNE

Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1549/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Mrs. Snehal Sameer Bhujbal, V The Income Tax Officer, Sanswadi, Nagar Road, S Ward-13(2), Pune. Pune – 412208. Maharashtra. Pan: Blcpb5495C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac],Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2018-19 Dated 16.05.2025, Emanating From Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 19.01.2024. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') It Be Held

2,10,45,150/-, the bifurcation of which is as under [reproduced from 148A(b)). Information Description Amount code TDS- TDS Statement – Payment for purchase 14030100 194IA(P) of immovable property (Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

150% or 200% as prescribed\nfrom time to time. Clause (2) to section 35 of the Act provides that no deduction\nshall be allowed in respect of expenditure mentioned in clause (1) under any\nprovisions of the Act. Clause (3) further lays down that no company shall be\nentitled for deduction under clause (1) unless it enters into agreement with

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

150% or 200% as prescribed\nfrom time to time. Clause (2) to section 35 of the Act provides that no deduction\nshall be allowed in respect of expenditure mentioned in clause (1) under any\nprovisions of the Act. Clause (3) further lays down that no company shall be\nentitled for deduction under clause (1) unless it enters into agreement with

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

150% or 200% as prescribed\nfrom time to time. Clause (2) to section 35 of the Act provides that no deduction\nshall be allowed in respect of expenditure mentioned in clause (1) under any\nprovisions of the Act. Clause (3) further lays down that no company shall be\nentitled for deduction under clause (1) unless it enters into agreement with

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLIGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

150% or 200% as prescribed\nfrom time to time. Clause (2) to section 35 of the Act provides that no deduction\nshall be allowed in respect of expenditure mentioned in clause (1) under any\nprovisions of the Act. Clause (3) further lays down that no company shall be\nentitled for deduction under clause (1) unless it enters into agreement with

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

TDS & Disallowance for such Default vii. Refund Claim viii. Business Loss ix. ICDS Compliance and Adjustment x. Disallowance u/s 40A(7) (Gratuity provision) xi. Expenses incurred for Earning Exempt Income xii. Excess Contribution to Provident Fund, Superannuation Fund or Gratuity Fund xiii. Capital Gains/Income on Sale of Property xiv. Business Expenses 3. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment

SHRIPATRAO DADA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3),, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

150/- being fees received from nominal members. However, the assessee had credited the same into Balance sheet under the head “Reserve Fund’ and not credited to P & L account though it is of revenue nature. The assessee filed explanation before the ld. A.O and submitted their reasons for not crediting the said amount to the P & L account

M/S JYOTI CERAMIC INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE, NASHIK, KENDRIYA RAJASWA BHAWAN, GADKARI CHOWK, NASHIK, NASHIK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 604 To 609/Pun/2022 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2019-20 M/S Jyoti Ceramic Industries 1001, Sadguru Sharan, Plot No 150, 29Th Rd., Tps-Iii, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050. Pan : Aaacj0247P . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Tds-Circle, Nashik. . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Suhash Kulkarni सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 27/12/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Six Appeals Is Challenged Against Separate Orders Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [For Short “Nfac” Or Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which Confirms The Orders Passed U/S 201(1A) Of The Act By Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tds Circle Nashik [For Short “Ao”], For Six Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2014-15 To 2019-20. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 6

150, 29th Rd., TPS-III, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050. PAN : AAACJ0247P . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-Circle, Nashik. . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Suhash Kulkarni सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 27/12/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 27/12/2022 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM The present bunch

M/S JYOTI CERAMIC INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 604 To 609/Pun/2022 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 To 2019-20 M/S Jyoti Ceramic Industries 1001, Sadguru Sharan, Plot No 150, 29Th Rd., Tps-Iii, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050. Pan : Aaacj0247P . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Tds-Circle, Nashik. . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Suhash Kulkarni सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 27/12/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Six Appeals Is Challenged Against Separate Orders Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [For Short “Nfac” Or Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which Confirms The Orders Passed U/S 201(1A) Of The Act By Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tds Circle Nashik [For Short “Ao”], For Six Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2014-15 To 2019-20. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 6

150, 29th Rd., TPS-III, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050. PAN : AAACJ0247P . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-Circle, Nashik. . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Suhash Kulkarni सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 27/12/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 27/12/2022 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM The present bunch