BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

23 results for “TDS”+ Section 191clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi349Mumbai312Bangalore289Patna158Nagpur94Karnataka88Chennai86Kolkata79Raipur38Jaipur35Indore25Pune23Chandigarh22Ahmedabad20Cochin16Hyderabad16Lucknow13Visakhapatnam12Allahabad7Surat7Guwahati6Rajkot4Ranchi3SC3Kerala3Jabalpur3Panaji3Amritsar3Agra2Dehradun1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 20144Section 12A36Section 234E33Section 143(3)24Section 15424Section 10(20)24Section 1124Section 220(2)22TDS22Deduction

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 313/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Q2-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

12
Addition to Income11
Natural Justice11
Section 234E
Section 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 314/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 315/PUN/2020[2015-16 (Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,PANDHARPUR vs. DCIT (CPC)-TDS ,GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

ITA 305/PUN/2020[2011-2012(Q 4 - 26 Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 306/PUN/2020[2012-13 (Q3-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 307/PUN/2020[2012-13(Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 308/PUN/2020[2013-14(Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL , SOLAPUR,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CPC)-TDS , GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

ITA 309/PUN/2020[2013-2014 (Q2 - 26 Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GAZIABAD

ITA 310/PUN/2020[2013-14(Q3-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 311/PUN/2020[2013-14 (Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 312/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 NASSHIK, NASHIK vs. HARSH CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, NASHIK

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

ITA 302/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 1, Harsh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Nashik Sanskruti, Murkute Colony, Vs. New Pandit Colony, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422002 Pan: Aacch2277H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj S. Dandgaval Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-07-2024 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2023 Of The Cit(A) / Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue In The Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance To Rs.2,24,191/- As Against Rs.1,25,51,607/- Proposed By The Assessing Officer In The Remand Report As Against Rs.4,38,96,880/- Added By Him In The Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj S. DandgavalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133Section 133(5)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

191/- as against Rs.1,25,51,607/- proposed by the Assessing Officer in the remand report as against Rs.4,38,96,880/- added by him in the order passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. Facts of the case in brief, are that the assessee is a company engaged

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

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

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

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

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

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

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

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

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

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

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

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

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

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

The appeals of the assessee are DISMISSED

ITA 64/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 May 2023AY 2013-14

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”].

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tyagi & Ramesh SonimindeFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

section 37(1) of the Act, the absence of supportive bills, invoices, vouchers and failure on the part of appellant to demonstrate the impugned balance expenditure was indeed incurred during the course of conduct of its business leaves no scope for allowance merely on the proposition that such expenditure were indeed transacted through banking channel or were subjected

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

The appeals of the assessee are DISMISSED

ITA 65/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 May 2023AY 2015-16

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”].

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tyagi & Ramesh SonimindeFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

section 37(1) of the Act, the absence of supportive bills, invoices, vouchers and failure on the part of appellant to demonstrate the impugned balance expenditure was indeed incurred during the course of conduct of its business leaves no scope for allowance merely on the proposition that such expenditure were indeed transacted through banking channel or were subjected